I got into another debate with a person on the existence of good and evil. He, being a post modernist thinker, believes that such things are simply relative to the context in which they are observed and have no real definite meaning. While I might agree with him on an ethical level, where individual actions are regarded as right or wrong based on culture, on a moral level I have to disagree. From my perspective it is possible to do something culturally wrong that is morally right and vice versa.
On a basic level the concept of good is based on compassion. Compassion is the driving force behind every good regardless of culture, race, or socio-economic status. It drives a person’s attitudes and intentions towards others, and is often referred to as of love of and love for others. This is not the common romantic love that we all know about, or even the love that we have for our friends, but a broader love for all people that is referred to in such principals as “love thy neighbor.”
The more a person is in-tune with this side of themselves, the broader the scope of this compassion, and the actions it causes them to perform. For instance, a person who is strongly aligned to the precepts of good will be more willing to help those whom they do not know or only know casually, and will be more willing to make personal sacrifices to help them than a person who is not so strongly aligned. A person who is more neutrally aligned will generally only seek to act compassionately towards their friends and family, while people who are evil see compassion as weakness, and the promoting of weakness.
Because the attributes of good and evil are on the intentions underlying their actions an individual action can not be deemed good or evil in itself. In short a person can mean to do good and end up doing bad (a common mistake) and a person can intend to do something bad and end up doing something good (a fortunate turn of events).
In the end we all have a good and compassionate side as well as an evil, self centered, side. As we strive to deal with others, let your compassionate side rule your life and you will find yourself happier in the end.
-o0O Please note that this section will be undergoing some work as I try to refine this idea. After I performed more thougheral research on the concepts and definitions of compassion, I found it somewhat lacking. It seems that a cross between the eastern and western definitions is more what I am after.
The eastern definition that I found states: Altruistic action that seeks to relieve living beings from their sufferings and give ease and delight to them.
The western definition was: A strong feeling of sympathy and sadness for the suffering or bad luck of others and a desire to help them.
Since it is the thoughts, feelings and intentions that I feel is most important, rather than the action a blend of the two is a more desirable. Something along the lines of: Thoughts and feelings that inspire one to altruistic action that seeks to relieve living beings from their sufferings, give ease and delight to them.
There are several points that I think are important truths about this definition of compassion.
1. We can feel compassion even if we don't act on it. We can want to be compassionate even if we can't or don't know how.
2. It is these feelings and thought that cause us to find ways to act compassionatly.
3. Compassion is more than feeling sympaty for the poor and down trodden, it also activly seeks to give ease or make life better for others.
4. In addition to making life better for others, compassion can also seek to bring delight to others, to make them happy.
These are the four truths that are the corner stones of the compassion of the good. It is more than action, and more than a feeling of sympaty for the down trodden, but a feeling and desire to help everyone, downtrodden or not, to make thier lives a little bit better than it was before.
