tisdagen den 19:e juli 2011

Ethics, Idealism, Haurvatat

We should never use the words good and evil. Merely using the words brings us in the wrong direction. I don't see any reason why I would use terms like "astrology" or "dualism" either as they only direct me towards stupid myths (druj) away from the truth (asha). To stay within the realm of Zoroastrian ethics we should use words like "constructive" or "destructive" or "right" and "wrong" referring to constructive or destructive mentalities. The concentration camps of World War II were immensely "destructive" against humanity rather than "evil", just as an example.

Also, be careful when you use the term "idealism" in a philosophical discussion, it seems you use it in a sloppy Swedish sense where "idealism" is mistaken for "perfectionism". Idealism in English is a philosophical school lead by GHW Hegel in the 19th century and has really nothing to do with the private strife for perfection in life. That is "perfectionism". Which I have pointed out "haurvatat" has nothing to do with. "Haurvatat" is much closer to "harmony" rather than "perfection" in contemporary English.


2011/7/19 Daniel Samani
Dear Alexander,

I for myself think you are right in what you say (even though I must admit I haven't read ether Spinoza or Habermas work). But how does one relate to the reality of confusion and blurryness (as you put it) others in our society is captured in. If one agree (or clame to agree) on the ethics worldview but still use words as good and evil to colorize how one view the world. Simply ignoring this I feel wont help - how do we create ourself out of this mess?



Inga kommentarer: