Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

What we regard as right or wrong is actually pretty ambiguous, I have said it many

times before in my previous essay on the origin of morality (Morality A Love Story).
The very notion of right and wrong is basically the product of our understanding of
the nature and life itself, and life is full of this sort of duality. From the linguistics
point of view, it can be assumed that the birth of duality came from the nature of
opposite sex, some language, for example Spanish, Arabic and italic contains
gender based vocabulary and grammar. This sort of duality is what constitute our
thinking, hence we perceive most of the things in opposite, that is how our brains
work. Left and right, up and down, sun and moon, light and darkness, right and
wrong, sins and rewards.
But sometimes, just sometimes when the organ perceive something enigmatic and
too hard for the brain too compromise, the brains sometimes need to reconfigure
our pattern of understanding. The word awe is derive from a Greek words which
literally means a feeling of confound or astonishment where we become immersed
by the stimuli and we reconstruct our understanding of the universe. The feeling of
struck by awe is something we always sees in the eyes of a child. Always excited at
something new and peculiar, a child mind is a perpetual learning machine, always
rearrange and reconfigure, never bothered by the past or the present, a childlike
mind is a mind who is always immersed in the now, who lives in this very second,
this very moment.
Nevertheless, maybe it is not too late to introduce the old Plato in this case, okay I
request the reader to take a little detour from our topic, forget morality, forget right
or wrong. Lets imagine a hyphothetical scenario where a group of man and woman
is fettered in their knees and lives all their lives in a cave, the group of prisoner has
no sense of meaning on what going on outside of the cave, as all their lives is spend
in the dark cave, never once in the lifetimes they step out of their cave, the notions
of sun, cloud, animal, trees and flowers are rather alien to them. Now , imagine that
in front of the shackle cave-men there is a torch or a bonfire and in front of the fire
lies the cave wall. The cave people is shackle in a manner which they cannot turn
their head and always looking at the fire and the wall, and behind them (which they
cannot turn their head to) is the cave opening. So, the people perceive the outside
world or the outside of cave opening based from shadow cast by the passerby
outside of the cave, in fact they will only perceive that the world or their world only
contains shadows, a moving shilluoetes, and in time, they began too study the
shadows and gives them names based by their shapes and movement. They might
mistaken a lizard for a dragon, a cow for a goat, an ant for a diabolical monster. In
fact, the words or language they use to describe them must be a new gibberish
words created, and the words created is must be something to define the shadows.
In these sense, we can easily deduce that someone in the cave is wrong to say that
a lizard is a dragon, but by the same logic we may apply the outside of the cave
opening to be a larger cave, and now the whole boundless universe is in fact the
cave opening. This famous allegory explain the very nature of knowledge and how

we perceive our surrounding and then try to explain them. Back to our problem, we
too may be mistaken morality for something else, and perhaps the answer lies
beyond our petty cave, the new task of teacher of knowledge is to break this
shackle and introduce the outside world to these prisoner.

The challenge start with these notion;


If evil exist can one measure it?
The question itself is somewhat peculiar to the mind, actually to be precise, the
question post is rather consist of two part, the first one, does evil exist? And the
second one, are evil measureable? Note that the notion evil can also be replace by
good. Unfortunately, the answer become quite paradoxical, yes and no. The
former answer justification is, the notion evil is an immaterial entity, to say that it
exist would be a false aquisation to its immaterial essence, the words evil do
exist, and which means it truly exists eventhough only in the form of word and in
our mind. The latter question try to argue that can it be measured, if supposedly it
exist in our mind we sure need some tools to measure evil just like scientist use the
MRI to measure the brain activity on pleasure, fear, happiness and other emotion,
but the problem become more complicated as the concept of evil differ with every
individual, a person might say that a pedophile is more evil than a killer or vice
versia, the measuring tools which is our brain measure the degree of evilness
without a universal standardization, and sometimes the notion evil is regarded as
good in certain culture or belief, for example, the Australian aboriginal still practice
incest in their tradition something that universally accepted as wrong.