3 Answers

  1. The question of good and evil has always been relevant, and not only among people. For example, experiments were conducted that showed that monkeys also have a sense of justice/injustice. Probably, monkeys also want good, but sometimes it turns out evil, why?

    If you think in terms of “good” and “evil” (you can use other categories, of course), then you must first understand the essence of these categories. Good and evil are opposite, polar categories, like good/bad, beauty/ugliness, etc. Are all people beautiful? Are all people good? Or maybe there are absolutely bad people? When we grow up, we realize that the world is more complex, and many things are “intertwined” in us: a good person can behave badly, an ugly person (for example, by modern standards) can seem beautiful to someone, etc.

    This leads to the first paradox-people have a different understanding of the categories of “good” and”evil”. Some people believe that they are doing good through war (religious wars, for example) — are they right? There is even a whole theory (in my opinion, it is not perfect, but it is worth mentioning) – Overton windows. It's about how something acceptable can become unacceptable in society, and vice versa.

    The second paradox is that people cannot live without conflicts (like other living beings), and conflicts are probably evil in your opinion? We are all animals, we are corporeal beings, not angels, we need resources, and sometimes this leads to a redistribution of influences, both at the level of countries, and at the group, individual level. Yes, what is there – even when left alone, a person can be in a phase of conflict. With whom? With myself.

    Conflicts, in fact, are most often useful: through them, people achieve their goals (sometimes quite good for themselves), self-actualize, protect themselves, and so on.

    The third paradox that follows from the second is that if a group of people becomes purely friendly and does not enter into any conflicts, but at the same time has resources, then it inevitably becomes uncompetitive, because other people with different values will simply take advantage of this kindness. And don't forget about Maslow's pyramid of needs — if a person wants to eat, then he will not care about spiritual values.

    You can give other reasons, but I think this will suffice. We are not angels, unfortunately. This does not prevent us from improving ourselves, being kind, doing good things, but, however, “evil” will never end in the world, since there are the above-mentioned paradoxes. Of course, you can try to make an ideal society, there are enough such concepts-but why haven't they been implemented yet and why don't people like it when something is imposed on them? 😉

  2. Briefly – because everyone has their own “better”. And what is good for one person may be bad for another.
    Then, for the “best” person can chase it for their own. He can achieve “better” for himself, his family, and his state – but all this at the expense of neighbors, at the expense of taking away or ignoring the interests of others.
    Perhaps even someone wants the best for everyone, and strives to achieve the common good – but he simply does not have enough attention, wisdom, breadth of coverage to take into account all interests, to take into account all aspects of the consequences of his actions, so as not to harm someone with this. And it is impossible for the human mind to grasp this at all. (And we are not yet talking about the relativity of the concepts of “good-evil”,”benefit-harm”. Here, too, it is necessary to agree on what is considered “good” and “good”.)
    Therefore, all the projects of global happiness of humanity or individual states did not lead to the desired results (if the desired was really happiness, and not selfish interests covered by this).
    Well, separately, I believe that a conditional global good is impossible without the individual development of each person. It is impossible to organize or compel the masses to act out of the common interests of all, if each of the participants at the individual level is not guided by these interests, does not strive to create harmony himself.

  3. All people want good (and preferably everything) for themselves. And your inner circle. And the circle of similarity for each differs not only in composition, but also in size. Someone-yes, everything is alive, and even-everything is reasonable. But much more often this circle does not include humanity. Only a fairly small group.

    But everyone should declare that they wish everyone well. No one does not want to consolidate, unite all those around them against themselves.

    This is especially important for politicians.

    On a historical scale, we are as short-lived as one-day moths. What motivates individuals to conduct (at the expense of the people, as usual) risky large-scale experiments. The chances of achieving anything good in this way tend to zero. And the chances of breaking firewood are off the scale. Do you want the latest reactors to be built all over the country according to a single project, without testing these ideas either on experimental or on full-scale ones – in a deserted area? “Here! And all sorts of “hurrying to catch up” to benefit if not you, then at least themselves-this is how they see progress. Take gryzlopetrikovskaya Clean Water…

Leave a Reply