Talk:Wikiphilosophers/Goodness/S. Perquin

Everyone is good

I just happened to read a poem this morning called The Interrogation of the Good. Here it is in full:

Step forward:

We hear that you are a good man,

That you possess virtue.

You cannot be bought,

But the lightning which strikes the house,

Also cannot be bought.

You hold true to what you say.

But what do you say?

You are honest, you state your opinion.

But which opinion is that?

You are brave.

Against whom?

You are wise.

For whom?

You are loyal.

To whom?

You serve justice.

But whose justice do you serve?

You do not consider your personal advantages.

Whose advantages do you consider then?

You are a good friend.

But are you a good friend of the good people?

You fight the enemy.

Have you chosen the right enemy, though?

Hear us then:

We know you are our enemy,

As you know we are your enemy.

That is why we shall

Now put you in front of a wall.

But in consideration of your virtue,

Your fine merits and good qualities,

We shall put you in front of a good wall and shoot you

With a good bullet from a good gun and bury you

With a good shovel into the good earth.

It is a complicated, ambivalent poem, specifically referring to Joseph Stalin's mass purges in the Soviet Union. However, it generally seems to strengthen the opinion that everyone is good.

I guess a Socratic question would be: "if everyone is inherently and fundamentally good, why do we have words for concepts like violence, malignance, and shame?" in essence, what about the opposite of goodness?

More specific to S. Perquin's opinion that one who follows a bad path "will naturally be adjusted by gaining new insights": "are humans not 'naturally' capable of ignoring new insights, curiosity, self awareness?"

Cheers! Modestmicah (discuss • contribs) 19:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Dear @Modestmicah, thanks for your message! That's a good question. I think that whatever has created our 'being' is not perfect, whether that is universal consciousness or God. Therefore, as humans, we are also not perfect and make mistakes. If our creator were perfect, it would not know what imperfection is. I think that people tend to label each other as 'bad' when someone doesn't meet the expectations of what they believe that person should be. And I think it also depends on the person to whom you are applying these standards. A construction worker might be labeled as 'good', while a politician could be seen as 'bad', even if they have exactly the same qualities. You might expect a politician to be more intellectual and thoughtful, while you expect a construction worker to have more discipline and precision. People often use double standards for who or what is good or bad, I think.

Anyway, I think that everything comes your way in such a manner that, at some point, you can no longer ignore it. Deep down, you then feel the urge to change something within yourself, bringing you back—at least in your perception—on the right path. Because I believe that good or bad is also relative. What is good for one person might be bad for another. If people truly do not learn from their mistakes or new insights in their lifetime, then that was apparently their right path for this life. They had something to experience. In a next life, they will reincarnate as someone else and follow a different path that might be the 'good' path. Again, good or bad is relative, so I don't actually think there is truly a good or bad path. Life unfolds as it should.

I hope I have given a good answer to your question. It is very complex matter. And the more I think about it, the more difficult it seems to become! S. Perquin (discuss • contribs) 20:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)