Relativity of ethics: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:Good or evil.jpg|alt=Good or evil|thumb|Is this good or evil or both?]] | [[File:Good or evil.jpg|alt=Good or evil|thumb|Is this good or evil or both?]] | ||
'''Relativity of ethics is the concept that something that is deemed ''good'' might not be good for everyone. i.e. the words ''good'' or ''bad'' are relative terms and their meaning is entirely dependent on its contextual [[framing]].''' | '''Relativity of ethics is the concept that something that is deemed ''good'' might not be good for everyone. i.e. the words ''good'' or ''bad'' are relative terms and their meaning is entirely dependent on its contextual [[framing]]. So in these times, for people who want to do good, how can this be determined?''' | ||
Take for example the story of Star Wars. Luke and the Rebels went out to blow up the Death Star. However, flip the perspective of the story, an Imperial officer coming to work on the Death Star to feed his newborn baby? Flip back, is Luke doing ''good'' when he launched the proton torpedo blowing them all up or was the Imperial officer doing bad when coming to work to feed his child? Isn't the Star Wars Saga just a story about a group of heartless terrorists? | |||
== The Definition of ''Good'' == | == The Definition of ''Good'' == | ||
In this galaxy, not so far away.. under your feet in fact, we all stand on the earth. We all drink the same water, breathe the same air, if someone truly thought their aim was to do good, their actions would primarily be involved in protecting the earth as this is common to us all. | In this galaxy, not so far away.. under your feet in fact, we all stand on the earth. We all drink the same water, breathe the same air, if someone truly thought their aim was to do good, the only 100% good, would be what is in the common good for all. i.e. their actions would primarily be involved in protecting the earth as this is the common good to us all. If we can start to reframe, one can start to see who the real [[Climate baddies|bad]] and [[Earth Heroes|good]] actors are. | ||
Revision as of 23:19, 13 September 2022
Relativity of ethics is the concept that something that is deemed good might not be good for everyone. i.e. the words good or bad are relative terms and their meaning is entirely dependent on its contextual framing. So in these times, for people who want to do good, how can this be determined?
Take for example the story of Star Wars. Luke and the Rebels went out to blow up the Death Star. However, flip the perspective of the story, an Imperial officer coming to work on the Death Star to feed his newborn baby? Flip back, is Luke doing good when he launched the proton torpedo blowing them all up or was the Imperial officer doing bad when coming to work to feed his child? Isn't the Star Wars Saga just a story about a group of heartless terrorists?
The Definition of Good
In this galaxy, not so far away.. under your feet in fact, we all stand on the earth. We all drink the same water, breathe the same air, if someone truly thought their aim was to do good, the only 100% good, would be what is in the common good for all. i.e. their actions would primarily be involved in protecting the earth as this is the common good to us all. If we can start to reframe, one can start to see who the real bad and good actors are.