Perhaps it's sad that I constantly wonder whether man is inherently good or evil. Perhaps it's merely evidence that this mind really is active. Either way, the conclusion I've arrived at, at least for the moment, is that we are neither.
The world is not made of people that are good, just as it is not made of people that are evil. The world is made only of people who have free will and choose to act on it. This provides a lot of gray area for us to inhabit.
Good and evil is a matter of perspective. Joe Kavalier of Chabon's The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay thought the imprisonment of his family in the Holocaust was an act of pure evil. But in Hitler's eyes, it was justified. Granted, the world has judged Hitler as a mad and evil man. But this is another matter of perspective. For had Hitler succeeded in his genocide, and won the war, would history not look at him in a different light?
Oedipus viewed his actions as evil, and poked his own eyes out. The rest of us would also view his actions as evil to some degree, or at the very least very icky. But the prophet that told him he would commit such "evil" actions would not necessarily view them as evil. Instead, the prophet might just view them as fact, just an occurrence.
The point I'm trying to make is that my question cannot be answered. Which is kind of a bummer. But I'm okay with it because it leads to a much more interesting question: Who is truly just in deciding what is good and what is evil?
That's my big question. At least for now.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Is "icky" the label for "gray area"? :) Great entry--I love how you arrive at a different question, in the end. I would side with you in terms of the gray area--some of my recent readings in the spirtiual/psychological areas suggest to me that the will we act on which can account for "evilness" is really a matter of ego. That is, by letting go of ego, we let go of that which can harm ourselves and others. Not as easy as it sounds.
ReplyDelete