☀️
⛅
🐦🐦🐦
Evil is nothing other than to be inadequate should be.
( Hegel's Encyclopedia ).
It is always very difficult to speak about the "good" that would result from "bad." This broader vision is not yet part of our habits of thought . We can demonstrate a greater understanding towards some transgression, and find ourselves overload aggression towards those close to us . Only a few people capable of extreme compassion, able to express their love in all circumstances. The violence of evil, natural revolt against the unspeakable, the desire for revenge, easy to judge the other, the inability to put in place the offender, the need for scapegoats, are still too present in our society ( it is also good to know why the media stimulate more these natural reactions instead of a real education ) .
Talk positive about the "evil" could hurt those who have experienced or are still feeling the torment. It is also likely to be misunderstood by many of our peers who can associate the need to understand, to a lack of empathy. The assimilate bad Darwinism, religious fundamentalism or a morbid fascination for evil.
We obviously are in any of these cases. To make sense of the real, to capture whether or not a human destiny is, we simply need to understand the true nature of evil. The deep sense of his presence in our species.
Assuming that every action affects the following and can be the source of a number of unexpected consequences, any crime, even the most horrible, may cause unintentionally a quantity of goods .
The worst harm, such that often relate the media can lead beyond all suffering and despair for families it touches a real legislative work at the company . It can allow other people to put safety locks, restrictive laws and strong enough deterrents to prevent other similar crimes from happening . So at the end of its chain, a heinous crime, can eventually provide a substantial benefit to humanity.
The evolution of the worst is obviously inevitable, it is not a given choice of man. It is obvious that if we really had a choice between inventing our banned before the bad factions taking place or as is the case today, invent our banned after the bad actions have taken place ( by law ) humanity would have chosen the first approach .
In the area of good and evil, we are still unable to prevent rather than cure. Yet we have acquired the means to anticipate the worst. Only the means are still reserved to a few specialized areas . Those in the aerospace industry or pharmacy (eg, most accidents are considered before sending men into space, is a drug is put into service after being sure to 99 % of its harmlessness ) . In everyday life, we are not there yet. In the time it took to reach the excesses often difficult for the company to finally do something.
Conversely, sometimes in wanting to do good deeds eventually cause more harm than we would have liked. Karl Marx, working in his doctrine, did not imagine that some people would use its name and concepts to build a world so far from his intentions and principles .
In the opposite direction, Hitler and his accomplices, were far from thinking that their criminal folly, not only end with their own death, not only do not destroy people and groups of people were dying to destroy, but also unaware that their genocide is the cause of a fundamental law to protect the future of genocide, i mean the iCC, the international Criminal Court . ( The first international crimes found will the Nazi and Japanese crimes. 8 August 1945 London Agreement constitute the Nuremberg Tribunal and the concepts of crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. In January 1946 will be its equivalent, and the court of Tokyo )
Unfortunately, without going to touch the heights of horror, as was the case with Nazi concentration camps, mankind would never have taken the decision to establish for the first time in its history, a tribunal to prosecute crimes against humanity. We have proof with the First World War .
A quantity of decision and command ordered during the war 14/18 ( as the use of poison gas ), already deserved to be considered crimes against humanity. They do not have to trigger this decision to the end of the war . Prevailing at that time have refused because they all shared, losers as winners in the agreed responsibilities horrors . (8 million people and 6 million disabled ) .
2001
Pour moi, je suis à peu près persuadé que, parmi les philosophes, il n'y en a pas un qui pense qu'un homme pèche volontairement
En vérité le moi rusé, le moi sans amour, qui cherche son avantage dans l'avantage du plus grand nombre, ce n'est pas à l'origine du troupeau mais son déclin.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Ce n'est pas une utopie. C'est une trajectoire déjà visible, inscrite dans l'histoire depuis le premier primate. Lentement. Imparfaitement. Mais dans une direction.
☀️ Découvrir le fondement