Also it is obviously that people often correlate good and bad to their current requirements and needs. Since the beginning of human existence people use such words as morality, generosity, ethics, kindness to describe the goodness; and immorality, coarseness, infirmity to describe badness. People see goodness and badness in a way they want. However, overabundance of sources which define goodness and badness such as society, religion and mass media have made lots of confusions in describing
I think that good and evil is inherent in all of us, as humans, and has been within us since the beginning of our existence. It is impossible to know the exact origin of good and evil, but I suspect it was bestowed upon us by God as a way to test all of us with the concept of free will. The concept of free will gives each of us the right to choose between good and evil. People everywhere need to understand that there will always be bad people out there and people who want to hurt others. Knowing this, we all need to try to always be good and make the world better to create a balance between good and evil.
However, the good will may depend on outside factors to bring about good in a person. Thus, I argue if Kant’s theory were true, it would be very difficult to be a good person as utilitarianism do not allow for acts that go beyond duty. Kant’s argument suggests that good will is the only thing good without qualification. First, Kant begins to distinguish between things that are good without qualification and things that are good only under certain qualified conditions. For example, gifts of nature such as understanding, wit, and judgement, or gifts of fortune such as power, riches,
I am sensible, that, according to the past experience of mankind, friendship is the chief joy of human life, and moderation the only source of tranquillity and happiness." (Hume 11.108, pg. 97) He also says that he believes in the events of punishing and rewarding, but who could provide valid punishments and rewards without judging the individual, too harshly or too much in favor of that person. As mentioned before people usually act in order to benefit themselves, there could be a possibility that someone punishes someone due to a personal vendetta they hold on the person or they may reward them greatly when a reward like that is not required in the first place. Throughout history religious doctrines have shaped communities and provided rules to live in harmony with everyone; that includes condemning acts of murder, stealing and many more.
We have been seen on the television or magazines that having a good life means being rich or famous when many of them, in reality, are miserable by a problem that wouldn’t affect ordinary people. Personally, I believe that there are many factors that should be considered when it comes to a good life. So a good life can be understood in at least six ways. Having a good education can be considered as a factor to live a good life. Both Plato and Aristotle agree that a good education is a way to acquire virtue.
This creates a problem in that morality impedes on the good because to be moral means to make appropriate sacrifices. What a person wants in life is not always going to be the best choice and thus a person has to give up certain things that he or she wanted for the ultimate good. Morality relies on the ability to make proper decisions, to distinguish between right and wrong, and to understand the subliminal consequences of one’s actions. In a piece known as “Spring and Autumn Annals” composed by Dong Zhongshu, it is mentioned how the term humaneness refers to ‘others,’ while the terms rightness refers to the ‘self’ (De Bary, 1999). As has been previously defined, rightness refers to a realm of morality and thus one can conclude that there is a certain amount of ‘self’ present in
If you know a friend is good then you can trust him or her. You can trust a friend when he or she has a good character. Later on, Socrates says what if good equals to self sufficient? Because that way you need nothing, but of course that cannot be human beings since human beings cannot be self sufficient. We cannot serve someone who has no need.
Good and Evil Are not Real The concept of good and evil is one of the most foundational apothegms ever known to humankind. It was a crucial stepping stone for other morals, and it is what averts society from pandemonium, by providing structures for laws. But, one may ask oneself; where did the conceptualization of good and evil arise? I believe that good and evil does not exist and are entirely artificial. Ludicrous is what one might be thinking after I’ve stated such a radical exposition, but I disagree and can justify my argument with factual evidence.
Inadequate Relationships When a man or woman commits a crime, the world is disgusted by his or her inhumanity. Humanity is quick to denounce the criminals from the human race, claiming that no true human is capable of such atrocities. While humanity’s statement may not be true in a genetic standpoint, the majority of the world considers it true from a moral perspective. To many, humans are born with compassion and love blooming in their hearts. However, they fail to form these coherent statements of disgust and denouncement when they learn about a different group of perpetrators— children.
This is an act of injustice, it is unfair to the innocent people who were killed. Rationality and Reasonableness also come into play here. When we talk about human beings we mean rational beings and “treating them as ends-in-themselves" means respecting their rationality. The reasonableness of a person would not allow him/her to manipulate and use people for his/her purpose, no matter how good and noble the purpose maybe. If we use people for our purpose it defeats the idea of the purpose being 'noble ' in the first place.