Good or evil?

Who cares?


Above Mo's blog, diabolus in homina, is a picture saying: Good or evil, who decides?. Which brought me to write this next piece;

Moral relativity are just two words coinciding in a world which brought forth a society in which greed is rewarded and generosity regarded like a venereal disease.
I could go on and quote and preach and wave a judging finger, but I won't. Nothing is to be gained from repeating words and thoughts about mankind's morality when those words have faltered time and again and man's morality just perished in the face of vice and sin.

Why call it relative when there's nothing absolute about morality and relativity is just immoral?

Nietschze was wrong when he said God is dead, how could he not be? How can one die, when one has never lived? When one is only a notion humans needed to not be afraid at night?

Humans created god, not the other way around*.

And in our infinitely finite wisdom we rhymed god with infinite wisdom, the perfect superpower, and from that almighty throne god looked down and he saw what wasn't good and what was. He could know it, he knew everything. So in his "infinite wisdom" he created the tree of good and evil.

At this point in my, for lack of a better name, essay, you will have to excuse my language, but who in their right "infinite" mind plants a fucking tree of good and evil. Like it's not evil in itself to taunt the newborn human race with such power. Only a human could ever think of it.


Or, in other words If morality were dreamt up by the immoral man, can't it be said morality itself is by its very nature immoral, regardless of man's claim to the divinity or morality?
And why? Because we're inherently evil. Point in case, that same fucking tree. Without cause, without culture, without famine, pain or anything short of a perfect life (because, he, we were in paradise) with just one talking snake we threw everything away, defying God and kicking of ten thousand years of human misery. And nothing much has changed. So whether you call it nature of nurture, man is just bad, utterly, utterly, bad-ass bad.


Morality, especially moral relativity is a laughing stock. Even if one's judgment is clear, unclouded by mortal coils like upbringing, opinion or perspective, unburdened even by the obscuring powers of wisdom and one gets a fat shot of luck and make the perfect decision, one will have to share it with six billion people. Odds are not everyone is going to agree with lonely old one.
And finally, as Rutherford must have said, the nucleus of the matter reveals itself. For if we were to share our opinions, if we found a way to unite mankind and mature the scattered conscience of the human race and densify our goals, our ambitions and our efforts we could actually achieve something.

And it doesn't even matter, because when everyone unites, herd mentality will kick in, automatically acting out in the way most suited to everyone in the herd**. So if we we're to unite, really, truly, altruistically unite, morality as well as relativity will be just as archaic as the notion of God.

So you see, you shouldn't focus on good or bad, focus on becoming whole as a species and acting out in a way that anyone can identify oneself with, for it can't be that hard.

So maybe the question of good and evil is just a farce and something better is waiting just down the road.


And you all thought I was a cynical man. At least I am immoral.

 
P H B Gaber


 
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam


 
* I feel I need to clarify, I did not mean to offend anyone, merely offer up my own visions, albeit poorly due to rhetoric considerations. For all intents and purposes, I could be considered a tolerant deist, critical of religion in general, but not denying anyone theirs. The reason of mentioning religion in this context was purely to invoke a feeling of wrongly justifying morality by pointing to god, claiming "he made it so".


 
** I concede this principal only applies to a perfect society, even then not to a society at large, save a planet on the whole. However, I do believe holy in the principal itself and feel something should be done with it. It's a practical implication of something that happened some time ago, which no one knows about and even less people believe has happened, which mustn't be bothered with if you value your mind in a single piece and not utterly blown.