Tag: absolutist

Maybe And Probably Not

Hamar WilliamsLeave a comment

How do we really know. Fixed absolute ideas of how things were. What if one clue to histories truth was lost and now we determinedly believe an inaccurate story. We miss one piece of the jigsaw, now we cannot see what once was. What if all we need is this one piece to confirm what many suspect but none can prove, do we dismiss entirely the possibility that this may in fact be the true story and not the one we think we know. When do we learn to question. Who do we trust to ask the right questions. What if we already have the piece but refuse to believe what it is showing us, at some point we need to accept, but do we ever do this as final. Should we.

And then our ideas in general. Our beliefs range far and wide. Think of all the philosophers out there disagreeing with each other. They can’t all be right but seemingly each one is. Each set of eyes view their own truth. In that case what is right. Do we have objective truths, how about one truth. Did that truth change when a new piece of the jigsaw is added and what happens when some accept it and the others turn away. If the greatest minds cannot agree, what hope are we.

How do we know the truth about scientific explanations or medicines. Both may be true at this time but new truths are constantly discovered and newer truths again. Always missing the point as the only truth being the inaccuracy of the old and therefore the latest too. How many letters behind my name are required before I can credibly speak these words. We never accept anything as final says the scientist or doctor before professing an absolute belief that they are right and you are wrong. They have facts but can they ever be true.

How do we really know that what we believe in politics. What if we are wrong. Are we strong enough, and arguably are we smart enough, to take a step back from what we believe and think we believe, see these beliefs for what they really are and readdress them. Can we do this objectively or will we be forever tarnished by the inaccuracies of existence. In these subjective times that have existed for eternity, we will never know as they run for another infinite millennia.

How do we advance society and people, and what really is the best approach to running a community. What if we’re wrong? No one person is the same yet we box the pack away into the very same space the world over. Who are we to tell others they are doing it wrong when we have never checked to see if we’re doing it right. Are we doing it right. Am I doing it right. I don’t even know what right is. I definitely don’t know their right.

As religion pokes it’s empty head around the corner we decide to not even entertain.

But to all I say maybe and probably not. Let’s start from there.

Good Versus Evil

Hamar WilliamsLeave a comment

Yesterdays piece is apparently the one hundredth on this blog which understandably I’m reasonable pleased with. There’s a good chance you’ll struggle to find many things I’ve stuck to for three months, especially as, or maybe it’s because, it has been a daily exercise. It seems only fitting then to go with the suggestion I made yesterday and discuss the concept of good and bad with this being piece 101, fitting indeed if you ask Winston in 1984. I’ll not be discussing rats in cages fixed to your face but more so the fact that although I clearly described something as good and bad yesterday I am generally loathed to do so.

It is an easy thing to do to describe something as either good or bad. It immediately gives the recipient of this information a general understanding of what we mean. If you call someone a bad man it is pretty clear that you are suggesting in someway they are responsible for something or have a character that could be described as negative. We have been conditioned by society through our education, our parents, movies, television, religion to have a general understanding of this notion. Typically in all these examples, in particular movies, although arguable they’re just the outcome of centuries of religious influence, we see the battle of good versus evil, with good usually overcoming some odds stacked against them to be victorious. In films it can be portrayed as the action hero overcoming a larger force of bad guys, usually represented by whoever is the political enemy of the time, think communists to Islamists to probably Chinese very soon. I haven’t read the Bible but have been brought up in a Christian country and therefore am aware of the general attempt to portray this good versus evil battle throughout the whole text. The absolutist necessity to portray Jesus as a righteous saviour over all the evil in the world, but he can only save you if you join him. It all comes back to power and contemporary politics too is riddled with this. Join us, we are the good guys who are fighting those other guys. They’re bad, it’s okay to kill them…and so on.

While all that seems pretty obvious it is still remarkable how successful it can be at manipulating people. We are so triggered by this concept of good versus evil that we fall for it in such an easy way. It is why despite the fact I dislike it I still used it in yesterdays piece as it was an easy way to get my point across. The issue though lies more with what is good and what is evil. People will always use the concept to manipulate people but we seem oblivious in these moments to step back and actually question what is bad and why that is a bad thing. Not only that but clearly one person’s good can be different to another’s, who are we really to say what is right and wrong about someone when it is clearly such a subjective thing. I am aware it would be better to discuss this after spending a few hours reading some essays on morality and ethics but like each piece I just start writing, wing it and see what happens. There may be a lack of depth to my point but ultimately with the knowledge that one thing can be credibly both good and bad to different people, as well as everything in between, how can we legitimately label something so without giving it real thought. It is such a simplified take on the world and that makes it easy to manipulate of course, but for this reason we must be so careful about throwing these two words around. Really who am I to say somethings bad; I’m no god, I barely even understand ethics and like everyone am prone to bouts of hypocrisy. To know ones fallible yet proceed with authority anyway, oh to be human, oh to misunderstand balance.