Dignity and DEATH

To start off on such a grand theme, I would firstly like to say that I will not attempt to bore my readers into why good and evil are mutually dependent and must both exist. I give my readers that much credit because I believe they know why, as they have pondered on the issue themselves. Though if you expect this blog to be the rambling verbage to why evil must be for good to exist, then I'm sorry to disappoint.

To those like myself who enjoy the art of words, words that give power to dreams and ideals. You will realise the title of this particular blog (Richard III by the way) and know that it is not about good and evil. But about evil under the skin of good, and vice versa. I would also implore my reader to have the mindset that both good/evil are nessesary, to hold a neutral stance/attitude to both good and evil, in particular with evil. As this blog aims to encourage readers to look beyond what they see (i.e. a situaion or some personification of good/evil), to look beyond good and evil...

For this reason, a neutral mindset will enable us to explore the issue through lens less clouded by subjective judgement. Also, due to the complexity of the nature of good/evil as a whole, both extremes should be visualised on a continuum (i.e. a line with good on one end and evil on the other. Not good and evil in 2 seperate domains with nothing in between).


A discussion with a good friend first gave me the idea to write about something like this. In our discussion, he used the example of a glass to represent man, there are also 2 more smaller cup on the table, 1 cup of coffee, and 1 cup of water. Using such an interactive yet simple model, he illustrated the small cup of water as the represention of good and the small cup of coffee as the represention evil (more specifically, actions associated with good and evil). When person acts out his decided action, depending on the nature of the action itself (say an action associated with evil intentions) he illustrated this by pouring coffee into the larger glass. On the other hand, an action of good intention will result in water being poured inot the larger glass. I believe you will understand what he's trying to illustrate, that ultimately you will get a glass (representing man) of whatever colour depending on your previous actions (good or evil). A simple model easily agreeable with most people.

As he illustrated this, I wondered...what decides whether the action will result in the whatever liquid will be poured? In other words, who or what decides whether the action will result in coffee or water poured? To those who hold a more external locus of control and believe in a higher power (namely the personification of good itself, god), how is one even able to distinguish let alone set what action is good/evil without truely understanding evil itself (if you don't understand this please refer to the first paraghraph of this blog, and I suggest you stop reading. I mean this because the next points that I make will seem rubbish to you leaving you believing you are the wiser man, and only fools believe they are wise), and to do that doesn't one need also to become evil (to understand true evil in order to set what is truely good)? And to these rules the almighty sets if the above holds true, doesn't it then mean that the rules he sets are invalid/false?

One may say "that god judges us and he is right because he is good, nothing can be more good than him". A flaw into this 'belief' however is that one can not truely be good without also truely being evil (how would you know that something is good without knowing what is evil? conversely, how would you know something is evil without knowing what is good?). This therefore means that (since god is truely good, this view is held by popular belief. As I have never encountered of a religion saying God is both good and evil) his judgements are biased, making it invalid. Note however that the same could be applied to the extreme of evil, it works both ways.

This takes me to my next point. It is therefore rational to say that whatever action you take (despite whether it's intended to be good/evil) will not necessarily ultimately be good/evil. For example, a man with good intentions may act based on that intention, but however (perhaps unknown to him) due to some chain reaction results in the action (intended to be good) being evil. Conversely it could happen to one with evil intentions. Referring to the coffee & water model, since an action may out of all probability put a good man into hell (because the glass will be full of coffee, highly improbable but not impossible) and be judged as if he was evil. There is a flaw in the model (not the coffee & water model, it does a good job in illustrating the truth by illustrating it visually. I am referring the to model to which the higher power/god follows).

There is no denial that religion itself simply is based on what is good, to achieve and strive for ultimate good. A flaw into this approach is the fact that it does not take into account (or very very limited account) learning what is evil (again, holding a neutral attutide towards this issue as suggested above). Do not misunderstand me, I'm not trying to preach evil (if you thought this then you have not stopped reading as I have suggested), I'm merely trying to illustrate a point often overlooked. One may (from a religous background) then also say that "my religion DOES teach me what is evil and steer away from it. don't steal, don't kill etc etc". But as illustrated above, the action you decide to take does not guarantee that your desired 'liquid' will be poured into your glass, regardless of whether you see the action as good/evil. To put it more simply, actions do not determine or put a guarantee that you will be truely judged as a good/evil person (i.e. judged by a higher power).

It would then be rational then to say that any religion which focuses on what is good without taking into account what is evil is ignorant and blind (Yes, big claims from such a small blog. Easily able to criticise without proper thought. Though take note that I'm not saying these beliefs are bad). And vice versa, with beliefs which focuses on evil. Because without truly knowing what is evil/good, how is one able to seek or know that is truly good/evil?


Feel free to rip what I said up and comment on points you disagree or don't understand. Don't be afraid to comment in fear of offending me, I'm happy to discuss this (since I'm bored, on holidays).
I'ld post up some new photos on my birthday too when I have time too.