Ron,
RE: Man alone is capable of any wickedness.
I'm not sure what you're driving at with cats. That cats and human share characteristics?
Yes.
Are cats capable of the things humans are? Hardly. Anything cats can do---good, bad, or indifferent---humans have taken to a new level, IMHO.
And I'm not "denigrating" mankind. That is your term. You assign a value judgement. I assign exactly nothing. It is what it is. Interestingly, and I think relevant, in the Biblical story of Moses in the book of Exodus, when Moses asks the burning bush, "Who shall I tell them sent me?", he is given this answer: Tell them I am sent you. Tell them I am who am.
So, cats am.
Self-hate is not my game either, nor hatred of you, nor envy of cats, nor hatred of cats.
<< ...insert the word "good" in exchange for evil or wickedness and you'll see that the assertion is just as valid. >>
Yes.
<< Good and Evil are nothing more than the end result of man's will imposed on his environment, as well as one another. >>
I don't see it that way. I don't see good or evil as being an inherent, irrevocable, unchanging aspect of anything at all. It is not contained in the thing. For one thing, I can see from my own life that experiences I clearly labeled as "bad" I later changed my mind about, and came to label "good." Furthermore, other things I labeled as "bad", while other people simultaneously labeled them "good." So which is it?
My answer is that it is not unchanging, is dependent on the perspective, and is created by the perceiver---largely based upon his perceived self-interest, not at all necessarily the same as his actual self-interest.
That is,
There's nothing good or bad,
But thinking makes it so.
That's not at all to say that perceivers might not agree in large numbers that something is good or bad. But still, this is simply majority rule, and hardly immutable; these things may change dramatically over time. Compare, for example, the attitudes that people held toward slavery 2,000 years ago, compared to now, and their beliefs about right and wrong in that regard. In ancient Rome, you would have been considered a lunatic to advance the proposition that slavery was inherently evil. Even the Roman slaves would have considered you a lunatic, particularly so given that the slaves in ancient Rome by and large enjoyed a lifestyle that was superior to that of the common people.
So which is it?
These considerations aside, pragmatism mixed with both self-interest and consideration for the welfare of my son, dictate that I clearly transmit to him the importance of the pursuit of good, and the avoidance of evil. And I will do all I can to guide him in these judgements, and help him to establish moral principles.
But in the end I recognize that I cannot be a substitute for the development of a conscience within him, and the fearless and unflinching questions he must ceaselessly ask himself regarding the "good" or "evil" that he does, if I am to equip him to grow and prosper and develop and give on this planet, to the benefit of himself and those around him. Now, I ain't much good at bein' noble, but that's the sort of contemplation I try to wallow in, and call it what you will, it hardly springs from self-hate.
Regards,
Walkingshadow |
