陈凯论坛 Kai Chen Forum 不自由，毋宁死! Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death! 陈凯博客 Kai Chen Blog: www.blogspot.com 陈凯电邮 Kai Chen Email: firstname.lastname@example.org 陈凯电话 Kai Chen Telephone: 661-367-7556
什么是“好”的定义？Be Good for Goodness Sake
什么是“好”的定义？Be Good for Goodness Sakein 陈凯论坛 Kai Chen Forum 不自由，毋宁死! Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death! Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:10 am
by Kai Chen
Not for Interest - Be Good for Goodness Sake
价值一语： Words of Value:
Good has two meanings: it means both that which is good absolutely and that which is good for somebody. --- Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics, VII
好有两层含义： 好只为绝对的好，与好对某些人好。 --- Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics, VII
By Kai Chen 陈凯 （Written 9/28/2006, Reprint 9/27/2011)
The recent purge of China's Shanghai Mayor Chen is only the latest corruption committed by the communist regime under Hu, all in the name of anti-corruption.
Ousting some corrupt officials in China has a deceptive appearance of anti-corruption ethics in it. But anyone who knows China knows exactly that what happened to Chen has nothing to do with being good or moral by the communists. On the contrary, it is all about power-struggle. In other words, it is the very manifestation of China's corruption itself, and it is the very manifestation of China's evil.
I put Aristotle's quote about ethics above to show you that "Be good for goodness sake" is the prime component of morality. The utilitarian part of the ethics "good for somebody" is only under this prime component.
I will further elaborate on the definition of being good:
Is being poor or rich the definition of being good? No. How a person gets to be rich or poor, how a person uses his wealth or struggle to pull himself out of poverty shows a person's morality and character. Simply being (such as being born into wealth or poverty) poor or rich has nothing to do with morality.
Is being strong or weak the definition of being good? No. How a person applies his strength, how a person strives to rid his own weaknesses shows a person's morality and character.
Is being for others or for oneself the definition of being good? No. To gain power and control in the name of being for others is the definition of being evil (Mao is such an evil example). To harm others in order to benefit oneself is also the definition of evil. While helping others in need with absolute goodness in heart and without expectations to benefit oneself is indeed good, jogging around to take care of one's own health is also a manifestation of being good.
Is being loyal to a country, a religion, or loyal to a family or a person the definition of being good? No. Many evils have been committed in human history under the name "loyalty" to a nation, a religion or to other people such as some ancestors. The current world-wide terroism is only one such example.
Is being smart and intelligent the definition of being good? No again. How one applies his wisdom and intelligence shows one's morality and character. Modern leftists all have some "intelligence superiority complex". They all label themselves as being "smarter" than those on the right. Clinton is such an example of smart leftists. Yet he only uses his wicked intelligence (such as knowing what "is" is) to rid himself all the individual responsibility regardless how much harm he has done to others. "Virgin whore" hypocrites is what I call these smart and intelligent nihilists.
Is being stupid and ignorance the definition of being good? Of course not. Yet the Chinese somehow take superstition, ignorance and confusion as some kind special morality only the Chinese can possess and understand. Cultural Revolution started exactly just that way.
Is being nothing or something the definition of being good? No. Being nothing by logic cannot be being good. Being something to harm others is definitely NOT good, but evil.
Then what is good??
Have you heard the Christmas song singing about wanting children to "Be good for goodness sake" when Santa Claus coming to town? It is simple, deep and right to the point: Good can only be defined by goodness itself, nothing else.
When you have done something good, you know it in your heart and in your soul. You don't need proof from outside yourself or others' recognition to know that you have just done something good.
When you are in love, you know it in your heart and in your soul. You don't need others' approval and verification to know that you are in love.
When you are joyful and happy, you know it in your heart and in your soul. You don't need to look into others' eyes to find your own emotions and feelings.
When you live a full and meaningful life, you know it in your heart and in your soul that you indeed exist. You don't need to bump into other, to be above or below others to know that you are alive and in existence.
When you are free, you know it in your heart and in your soul that you are in the realm of freedom. You don't need the collective, the nation, the culture, the skin color, the religious leaders, the government to tell you that you are free. And if you do indeed need others to tell you in order for you to know that you exist, that you are happy, that you are free, your life, your happiness, your freedom are all in a gigantic cloud. And your existence is indeed in serious doubt. Often if not always, your so called life, happiness and freedom are only illusions and lies.
So, face yourself, face your own conscience, face God, you will find who you are, what you are and whether or not you are indeed Good or Evil, Happy or Miserable, Free or Enslaved, Loving or Full of Hatred, in Existence or in Nothingness.
|« Sidney Powell responds after Trump campaign says she is not part of legal team:||孤独与自知 Being Alone-Prerequisite to Self-Knowledge »|
0 Members and 1 Guest are online.
We welcome our newest member: ancientgroundhog
The forum has 904 topics and 2613 posts.