the good, the bad, the ugly
what type of person would be a good man?
is it someone who donate to the charity?
or is it someone who will help a old lady carry her things?
or is it your neighbor who let you dine at her place when your mother can't return home in time to make dinner?
ask a mother, she will probably tell her child these are good men, and to learn from them.
and so what makes a bad man?
is it someone who robs others of their belongings?
is it someone who don't give up his seat for the needy?
or is it your neighbor who sweep his rubbish to your side of the corridor?
ask a mother, she will tell her child these are bad behavior, and not to learn from them.
actually, human's sense of good and bad is rather... simple.
in fact it is overly simple, so simple that it is worrying.
as simple as 'he whose actions will benefit me in a way or another is a good man'
reverse hold true for the definition of bad.
of course, as societies are formed, the definition changed a little to fit a bigger picture 'he who contributes to the society is a good man, he who leech off or took from the society is a bad man.' (the benefit and harm need not be physical)
In fact the word 'gentleman' can be easily understood as 'a man whose demeanor pleases me'.
as you can see... these definition hides a underlying selfishness deeply rooted in human instinct.
Cao Cao of the three kingdom period said 'I am willing to betray the world, least it betrays me'
some says this prove him to abe a hero (hero in chinese '英雄' has slightly different definition than hero in english, it can refer people with great ambition), a leader, but from my point of view, it proves him a human.
lets look at how well these definition hold when put to a test.
lets look at a famous example, robbin hood.
to those who he had robbed, he is a bad guy, but he split his loot with the people, and the people loves him.
as long as it benefits them, so what if robbin hood is a crook? (in fact, he become admired as a hero.) crook = bad? not always, sorry mum!
this show good and bad is relative, not to the task committed, but to the party concerned.
it also shows that people tend to consider themselves more important than others. not that it is a bad thing, its only human.
time for a short story.
10 kids were playing on a railway. 1 of them realised that the railway looks quite new and said: "we should play on the other railway which is rusty, because it is likely this railway is in use and might be dangerous." the other kids laughed at him and ignored his advice while he himself shifted to the other track. now suppose you were there, witnessing the whole incident, realised to your horror that a train is indeed approaching and there is no time to ask the kids to run. in front of you is a lever, which would direct the train to the rusty track if shifted. what would you do?
if you chooses to pull the lever and save the 9 kids, you are the majority. but ask yourself this question, why should an innocent person answer for the mistake of others? why shouldn't the 9 kids be responsible for their own choice?
is it right that everyone should answer for their mistakes? of course.
however, being right doesn't make it a good act, imagine after the incident your doing leaked to the press. would the society agree that it is right to save one against 9? highly unlikely.
be course to the society, 9 > 1, and therefore you are doing the society a negative service of -8, and many would view you as 'bad' and a 'cold-blooded' killer.
anyone wonders why the murder of one village seems more acceptable when it is required to save the world? be course, else, you would die too. it benefits you! and it must be a necessary act! tell that to the villagers, see if they agree.
in order to be consider a 'good man' by a party, you need to do service to the party. and small wonder why corruption is still around after more than 4000 years of civilization. the theory and definition of good and bad is nothing more than an excuse to bring more benefit to the self or to the organization.
what is 'employee of the month'? oh the hardworking oe who always stayed after everyone left to finish his work, without OT pay. so as a result he got his photo hanged at the wall, and the company got a lot of work done at no cost(minus the photo).
and does the employee of the month necessary got promoted first? hardly, for the simple fact that the prize is given by the company and the promotion by your superior, to whom your 'goodness' doesn't match the girl who treat him for dinner last week. if your boss also happen to be the one giving the prize however, you might stood a much better chance.
all in the name of being 'responsible', 'hardworking', 'treat your college as your family' and 'treat you workplace as your home', we welcome a new sucker of the month to be hung on the wall. =X
so before you start complaining abut the world getting colder and god people are lesser, consider they might be like you, waiting for others to be 'good people' to them.
is it someone who donate to the charity?
or is it someone who will help a old lady carry her things?
or is it your neighbor who let you dine at her place when your mother can't return home in time to make dinner?
ask a mother, she will probably tell her child these are good men, and to learn from them.
and so what makes a bad man?
is it someone who robs others of their belongings?
is it someone who don't give up his seat for the needy?
or is it your neighbor who sweep his rubbish to your side of the corridor?
ask a mother, she will tell her child these are bad behavior, and not to learn from them.
actually, human's sense of good and bad is rather... simple.
in fact it is overly simple, so simple that it is worrying.
as simple as 'he whose actions will benefit me in a way or another is a good man'
reverse hold true for the definition of bad.
of course, as societies are formed, the definition changed a little to fit a bigger picture 'he who contributes to the society is a good man, he who leech off or took from the society is a bad man.' (the benefit and harm need not be physical)
In fact the word 'gentleman' can be easily understood as 'a man whose demeanor pleases me'.
as you can see... these definition hides a underlying selfishness deeply rooted in human instinct.
Cao Cao of the three kingdom period said 'I am willing to betray the world, least it betrays me'
some says this prove him to abe a hero (hero in chinese '英雄' has slightly different definition than hero in english, it can refer people with great ambition), a leader, but from my point of view, it proves him a human.
lets look at how well these definition hold when put to a test.
lets look at a famous example, robbin hood.
to those who he had robbed, he is a bad guy, but he split his loot with the people, and the people loves him.
as long as it benefits them, so what if robbin hood is a crook? (in fact, he become admired as a hero.) crook = bad? not always, sorry mum!
this show good and bad is relative, not to the task committed, but to the party concerned.
it also shows that people tend to consider themselves more important than others. not that it is a bad thing, its only human.
time for a short story.
10 kids were playing on a railway. 1 of them realised that the railway looks quite new and said: "we should play on the other railway which is rusty, because it is likely this railway is in use and might be dangerous." the other kids laughed at him and ignored his advice while he himself shifted to the other track. now suppose you were there, witnessing the whole incident, realised to your horror that a train is indeed approaching and there is no time to ask the kids to run. in front of you is a lever, which would direct the train to the rusty track if shifted. what would you do?
if you chooses to pull the lever and save the 9 kids, you are the majority. but ask yourself this question, why should an innocent person answer for the mistake of others? why shouldn't the 9 kids be responsible for their own choice?
is it right that everyone should answer for their mistakes? of course.
however, being right doesn't make it a good act, imagine after the incident your doing leaked to the press. would the society agree that it is right to save one against 9? highly unlikely.
be course to the society, 9 > 1, and therefore you are doing the society a negative service of -8, and many would view you as 'bad' and a 'cold-blooded' killer.
anyone wonders why the murder of one village seems more acceptable when it is required to save the world? be course, else, you would die too. it benefits you! and it must be a necessary act! tell that to the villagers, see if they agree.
in order to be consider a 'good man' by a party, you need to do service to the party. and small wonder why corruption is still around after more than 4000 years of civilization. the theory and definition of good and bad is nothing more than an excuse to bring more benefit to the self or to the organization.
what is 'employee of the month'? oh the hardworking oe who always stayed after everyone left to finish his work, without OT pay. so as a result he got his photo hanged at the wall, and the company got a lot of work done at no cost(minus the photo).
and does the employee of the month necessary got promoted first? hardly, for the simple fact that the prize is given by the company and the promotion by your superior, to whom your 'goodness' doesn't match the girl who treat him for dinner last week. if your boss also happen to be the one giving the prize however, you might stood a much better chance.
all in the name of being 'responsible', 'hardworking', 'treat your college as your family' and 'treat you workplace as your home', we welcome a new sucker of the month to be hung on the wall. =X
so before you start complaining abut the world getting colder and god people are lesser, consider they might be like you, waiting for others to be 'good people' to them.