Right & wrong cont.

To convince another that he is wrong... the holy grail of debate, who doesn't want to be agreed with? Its all well and good to "meet in the middle" and compromise with someone, but you always know they really still think they are right, they only half agree out of convenience. Once two people agree on what is right, BAM, its settled (unless there are more than two people around), but the point is that's when personal truth becomes recognized public belief.

The most important matters a society faces generally deal with getting a consensus on what is right. Many subjects are convoluted & near impossible to reach accord, luckily most of these (even if vigorously disputed) will not break us, regardless of which side wins (or if stalemate is perpetual). Some topics are easy, it's wrong to kill another person if they are no threat to you or others "It's a hell of a thing, killin' a man, you take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have" -Clint Eastwood. Almost everyone agrees with that, and those that don't... well, we will kill them ;)

We will never agree on what is right & wrong in all subjects, that's just not how we work. But I think we all can concede that when no consensus can be reached, we should indeed let Clint Eastwood decide.

Right & wrong

Views of right and wrong are so subjective, your right may be my wrong. So to it only makes sense to draw a line between a broad personal view of right/wrong, & matters so important we mean to insist on "right" behavior of others (laws).

The balance between effect on us by actions of others, and the effect on others by our insistence on a prescribed behavior, is the place laws should start. When a society decides on a law, it decides what is right & wrong, a large group of people insist on a given (right) behavior (feed your kids, pay your debts, etc.), or a need to NOT engage in a behavior (take things you don't own, kill people, etc.). Laws should protect individuals from negative effects caused by the actions of others, not force them to behave in a given manner, for only the purpose of the "comfort" of society. Conversely, laws should not protect the individuals right to cause harm to others in the name of "freedom". This balance between tyranny and anarchy is where all consideration of right & wrong, in regards to law, should be focused.

Laws of course are not the only outlet for a society's (or individuals) expression of their views on right and wrong, all forms of media & personal interaction are ripe for articulation of opinions on right/wrong. Letting others know what you think is right/wrong is a foundation of healthy personal interaction between people. Judgements on right/wrong are made every second of every day, from weather its right for you to eat some more ice cream, to if the latest massive spending bill by congress is wrong. Should you change your view of right & wrong on a subject because others feel differently? Maybe, if their reasoning persuades you to change your mind, or if the triviality of the subject makes a change worth it (ie. what movie is "right" to see tonight).

More later.

Where to start

I hope to put down some thoughts on what is going on in the world, the reality of it, not the standard party line or soundbite crap.

Weather its analysis of the latest urban myth, how big the universe is or what lie a given politician is telling today.

Comment at will, language is up to you, suggest topics, whatever. I dont hope to come up with answers to all of life's questions, but maybe at least I can make fun of people who think they have.