A not very timely note

This was a blog I once wrote during my high school and early college years. I keep it around for nostalgic purposes, but it is quite obviously no longer updated. I am looking to make a more professional blog presence in the future, but I still like to look at where I was mentally at certain points in time.

- G. Jan 2013



Monday, May 4, 2009

Sir's Random Dashes of Inspiration - Partly Mine, In Fact.

Ok, guys, I know you love my stories, but there's a heated debate that was going on between me and a very good friend of mine a couple of months ago... And it's a pretty big one, too.

Good VS Evil.

Now, now, I know what you're thinking : But, dude, that's like, so heavy, man! Everyone has his different opinions and stuff, so it's normal to debate about it!

Which is EXACTLY my point.

I read about this in a book a while back, a very good book titled Shantaram. Now, I don't know exactly if the author (Gregory-David Roberts) thought this up or if it was really passed down to him by a mafia leader, but, I find it to be particularily true.

The world has a tendency to complexify itself. Complexifying meaning not only ameliorating, but adding on and on. Therefore, if it is really so, it must be "God's will". And for you guys out there who don't believe in any god, or whose religions oppose this, you may also take it this way : it might not be god's will, but that's how the universe is going, no? That's the way it's always been going and when we did not try to change it, things were ok. The point in all this? If the universe is meant to complexify itself, it means that anything uncomplexifying it has to be bad, or "evil". An example would be murder. Murder takes one's life away, therefore reducing the amount of complexity in the world, therefore, it is evil. Of course, you have to abide by moral ethics and the such, but you get the point. Eating a lot shouldn't be a "religious crime" as the 7 deadly sins indicate (as an example). Therefore, anything considered as destroying or causing destruction would have to be bad and everything that helps or doesn't necessarily hurt means you're keeping on the right track. Of course, there's the dilemma of "killing the killer". If someone is pointing a gun at someone else and you had to either let the victim die or take away the criminal's life, what would you do? Some ponder that "eliminating" the criminal is a bad action, as you shouldn't interfere with another person's life. However, you've just saved some other person's life by eliminating the criminal, which is definitely something good. If you want, you can consider it as neutral : Keeping someone alive while someone else dies, because in any case, one of them ends up dying anyways.

My point in this? Exposing a philosophy that I approve, along with a few tweaks when it comes to details. And, now, if you, our readers, approve or disapprove, I want you to tell me about it.
If you really don't like this take on things, say so. If you like it, state it. Tell us why and why not, tell us how stuff should be in your opinion, maybe we can pool our resources together?

Remember, I always appreciate total honesty.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

In regards to being able to judge things, like crime, I do agree that it is much more complex than it lets on. While we have various ideas of seeing things purely as "good" or "evil", the often mentioned shades of grey plays a lot into this.

Sir said...

True, that... I guess that's why we like to rely on people who've studied the codes and laws and stuff, since we're not always sure of how we're judging things... although it doesn't always prove very helpful.

Thanks for reading and commenting, anon! :P