I apologize for not getting a new question out earlier but we got quite a few comments on the last question, so I let that go for a while and life got in the way for a while.
Ok, so we started out by asking what is a human being:
Here's what we got:
Specific Genetic Makeup
Potential to become more
Free Will
Morality
Products of our environments
Created in the image of God (My Mom's comment, she had trouble posting, so I'm putting this here for her)
From there, I wanted to ask what makes someone good or bad, but due to my "extensive" philosophical training ;-) had to ask what it means for something to be good or bad or if good and bad exist at all. To which I recieved some fascinating answers.
I think the resounding answer was that good and bad definitely exist. Figuring out what good and bad are however, is a much more difficult question.
Here are some of the answers we got for good and bad:
Meeting or exceeding an expectation
Pragmatism or General Utility
Something is good or bad relative to it's context
There are some clear cut cases of right and wrong e.g. abusing children, etc.
Personal experience
Another interesting point that I think Neil was trying to get at was we can determine good or bad by choice. You can change your attitude to turn a negative into a positive.
Religous or social conditioning
Rationality or Personal Reasoning (often called Moral Rationalism)
I think we can probably boil down most of those answers to saying that good or bad is determined by people, with a few possible exceptions. I don't necessarily subscribe to this belief, but that seems to be the general consensus, so here's the plan: we're going to proceed with the consensus and based upon our previous two answers, see what we come up with here.
So, taking that information I think we can move on and ask the question I had planned to ask in the last entry. How do we determine what it means to be a "good human being" or to live "the good life."
So, here's a little philosophy for you all. (Sorry I can't resist ;-) Philosophical arguments have a distinct structure. To reach a conclusion, you must first have your premises. So, based upon our discussion to this point here are our premises:
Premise 1: Humans are genetically distinct, possess the ability to become more than they are, have free will, possess a knowledge of right and wrong, are products of their environments, and are made in the image of God.
Premise 2: There is such a thing as good and bad
Premise 3: Good is defined as meeting or exceeding an expectation, something that is useful, something that is pleasing to the senses, our definitions of good are shaped by outside factors (society, religion, culture), we can control what is good through our attitude and we determine good and bad through our reason.
So, now here's the question or puzzle for this week: What conclusions can be drawn from these premises? It generally isn't this difficult because you usually have only simple premises, these are more complex. If it gets too complex, just take the answers that you gave for what it means to be a human and what it means for something to be good and draw your conclusions from that.
Here's an example of a conclusion that could be drawn:
Premise 1: Humans are defined by being able to choose good from bad
Premise 2: Good means something useful
Conclusion: Being a good human being means being able to choose something that is useful.
I'm afraid I may have gone off the philosophical cliff here. If I have, just answer this question: Based on what it means to be a human being to you and what it means for something to be good. Put those two together and figure out what it means to be a "good human being" What is a good human being?
Reasons for Hope:
Ok, so the reason for hope this week is the phenomenon known as "The Secret." I haven't read, seen, or heard the story yet but I've heard about it from many people. And from what I've heard of it, it sounds great. The power of positive thinking and visualization.
But the message isn't the sole reason for hope. The speed with which it has spread around the world really gives me hope. It just shows that a good message can spread virtually overnight, which really says to me that you can in a sense "change the world" overnight.
Quote of the Week
"If we did all the things we were capable of doing, we would astound ourselves." -Edison
7 comments:
Ok, so I see I've confused everybody with all my philosophy speak...
The main question is what do you think it means to be a good human being? Take your definition of what it meant to be a human and put it together with what it meant to be good. I'll get us started:
Among other things, I think being a human being means to question (maybe that's just me ;-)
For me good means helping others.
So, a definition of a good human being for me would be one who questions how to best help others? (And hopefully finds an answer!)
Hope that helps!
Yes that is a little easier to figure out *smiles*.
I like your answer, the unexamined life right...I agree. I also agree that a good human is one who helps others.
I think being a human being means to seek personal growth.
I think being good is found through a healthy balance of personal self interest and social responsibility.
I think the essence of being a good human then is to seek personal growth while doing so in a socially responsible manner. After interacting in this blog I have come to think that a good human is one that develops his/her judgment by seeking to understand "the good" to the best of their ability while respecting the grey that is often just the "envisioned good" of others.
I have seen a few comments that make relativism out to be dangerous and I strongly agree that it can be. However, I also feel that a belief in the absolute good is dangerous. When I think of any system, religion, philosophy etc. that has has become unquestioned or has become prey to "absolutism" it has always proven disastrous in mass scale historically.
Daigidan,
Thanks for your comments, I really appreciate them. I like your answer very much. I certainly agree with you that dogma can be a very negative thing. I think sometimes people just don't think for themselves, so dogma can have its uses if it's based on right principles. I think that's basically what religion is, a type of moral shorthand. That can certainly cause trouble though.
What kind of world would it be if everyone thought for themselves?
Wow Eric, I thought writing my comment would be hard, but I now see that it is far harder to write your post and get this apple rolling. :) I, for one, appreciate when you go off the philosophy deep end...when else would I experience that part of life? I'll answer, then read the comments so I'm not influenced. So the question...
"Based on what it means to be a human being to you and what it means for something to be good. Put those two together and figure out what it means to be a "good human being" What is a good human being?"
Let's go on the assumption that I forgot what I said it means to be human, and to be good...since I did forget. :) I'll answer the question "What is a good human being?" from a fresh perspective.
Now, good human being as far as being good at being human, or being a good, compared to bad, human being. I'll tackle both.
A human being that excels at being human needs to be more than they are today. God gave human beings a sense of drive, of purpose, of wanting to know and be more. I'm pretty sure those traits weren't given to my cat. She's happy lying around the house all day while I want to be president or at least a man of unquestionable character...good character. I would submit that in order to be good at being a human being one must strive to reach his/her potential while realizing potential is unlimited.
In order to be a good (not bad) human being, I think that falls in line with being a steward of our planet. Human beings rule the planet for whatever that means. We're the only ones who can choose to negatively or positively impact the environment of every other species. Being good means that I choose to make the world a better place for all and not to wipe out all species I find inferior. I'm answering this question by how human beings treat their surrounding, not each other.
So, a good human being is one that strives to be more than they are and to do so in a way that purposefully tries to make the planet a better place for all species. I wonder what I'll think of this answer ten years from now.
Neil McDonnell
Great answer Neil. That sounds very consistent with what you've said earlier with a human being someone who strives to become more than they are. I certainly see that in you and myself as well.
I also like your ideas of our being stewards of the planet; I guess that would mean having a healthy respect for all things around us, especially living things.
Thanks for the comments man.
Eric-
Interesting questions. I wonder what Einstein would think of this question...he once said "you can never answer a question from the same place it was asked," or something like that. Einstein's point is that we, humans, cannot solve our own deepest problems or answer our own deepest questions. We seem to be pretty good at discerning the world's problems (i.e. animals, the planet, etc) but we seem to be totally unable to answer the central questions that keep us up at night: who are we, why are we here, do I matter, what is good, etc.
Interestingly enough, when we do create an answer, regardless of what it might be, we cannot "prove" it to be correct. Instead we are subject to "Einstein's Constraints" and cannot answer our own question.
That said, I would ask everyone a counter question: regardless of your answer, upon what authority do you claim to be correct? Or, to ask this indirectly, how can you prove that you are correct? Indeed even the simple equation of 2 + 2 = 4 cannot be "proven" as ultimately true unless we first accept that it as reality. Once called into question, the equation means nothing an cannot be solved...its a veritable chicken and egg problem.
In this same vein, how should we propose reconciling these varied perspectives? Suppose that I believe in a "good" that is "bad" to another person. Who determines the clear victor? "The rich and poor have this in common, both go down to the grave"...
Some questions are answered by asking more questions.
ELH
Post a Comment