or something to be wrong, there must be something that is being done right to bring about that wrong?
in what ways one can become better at detecting and identifying such right things or doings?
any philosophical conjecture that may help prove the existence of such rights who lead to wrong?
share your thoughts on this, if you like.
best,
Dushwari
Re: right / wrong ?
Sometimes it happens that you speak the truth. It is right to speak the truth, after all. But that truth can result in severe loss for someone. In these situations, there comes a kind of clash between two or more values. Here "value" means some action, behavior or attitude that can rightfully or legitimately be expected from someone under given circumstance or situation. In the matter under discussion, there are two values involved. Since it is rightful or legitimate to expect that a person shall tell the truth, so telling truth is first "value" in this case. And since it is also rightful to expect that a person shall not cause any severe loss to let's say his friend, so to protect friends from severe loss is the other "value" in this case.
This clash of values shall direct that person to choose between telling truth and saving his friend from a severe loss. Actually, here, this person has to prefer one value to the other one. In such a case, if that person saves his friend from a severe loss by telling a minor lie, then this "decision" of telling a minor lie may not make him a "liar". This is just a case of "value preference"!
Re: right / wrong ?
iceburg,
so you feel that following and upholding truth and being right and supporting the right things and acts is relative and exception based?
best,
Dushwari
Re: right / wrong ?
iceburg, so you feel that following and upholding truth and being right and supporting the right things and acts is relative and exception based?
best, Dushwari
Yes it is relative. In our practical daily life, we routinely face many this kind of dilemmas. We regularly sacrifice one or more values for the sake of some other more important value/s.
But I am not saying that it is ethically all ok. We do feel guilty whenever we have to sacrifice any moral or social value, may be for a better cause. This Phenomenon of "value preference" is actually ethically "bad". It's better side is that at least it is not "evil". And in this sense, "evil" means an act whereby we destroy some moral or social value for the sake of no better cause, or even for a negative cause. I think this can be regarded as one of the differences between "bad" and "evil".
Re: right / wrong ?
iceburg,
you make sense.
i also would add that at no time, one should take a hike in self pity or make alibis and delibrately commit hurting any one as well as act unethically.
when people justify that they can be bad here and good there for their own seflish reasons, along time later, that is one of the worst things a person can do to own self image.
as a society and as a person, one must realize that acting on ethics is not a ping pong game.
consistency of characteristic values is a proof of how solid and reliable a person is. and it has impact not only on the person's own life but other lives as well.
best,
Dushwari
Re: right / wrong ?
You are talking about "principled" way of life. It is the approach where the persons tends to keep himself justified for all his actions, behaviours and even thinking. And yes ... if he starts justifying himself just on lame excuses,,, then his way of life cannot be termed as "Principled way of life".
Re: right / wrong ?
iceburg. you got that right.
it is about the principality in being wrong.
it is the apathy and careless manner in which people say one thing and do another and then still feel that they can justify their actions.
your claim that the principled way of life is an approach for a person who tends to make lame excuses is not misplaced.
the issue is that such a person, unfortunately feels the entitlement to be elusive and then feel that he can commit something wrong every time and yet make a naive face as if he was not at fault.
that is a dangerous behavior on his part and or his own self.
what can be done to get that person out of this mentality?
share if you like.
best,
Dushwari
Re: right / wrong ?
An interesting question indeed. I am not sure if my view will confirm to your beliefs.
** in what ways one can become better at detecting and identifying such right things or doings?
**To identify a right or a wrong, you have to have an ideology. Ideology can be religious, humanitarian, cultural, social, legal, free speech, etc. Without ideologies it is difficult to have clear understanding of why something is wrong or right.
However, the problem with ideologies is that they are subjective as more than one ideologies exist. Is my ideology better than yours or yours better than mine?
There is also possibility that one may start to think that his/her ideology is the best or universal ideology.
** any philosophical conjecture that may help prove the existence of such rights who lead to wrong?**
Theoretically, a right should never lead to a wrong. However, something which is socially unacceptable may be considered as wrong.
Re: right / wrong ?
good points, Witchdr.
i see what you are saying about ideologies.
still they should have substance that can be pit against each other, and kept fair by obligatory equivoca parameters that are not lopsided. in that is a built in safety net.
ideally this sort of reflection is not about whose is better, but the betterment of all over all, no?
best,
Dushwari
Re: right / wrong ?
** ideally** this sort of reflection is not about whose is better, but the betterment of all over all, no?
**
Exactly. :)**
Re: right / wrong ?
witchdr.,
whose truth is the truth ??
is it destined to be a no-win situation?
Re: right / wrong ?
Peace Sister
Things like Truth and Falsehood, Right and Wrong are absolutes and the Truth is not necessarily the Right and the Falsehood is not necessarily the Wrong.
Islamically I would agree with Iceburg in that the "value" chosen may need to compromise other values at the time.
This is why I think Islam often speaks in terms of better and worse, good and bad rather than always stressing the right and wrong. So I actually believe it is ethically right to preserve the feelings of someone if means a lie or keeping back the truth needs to be done. Infact in most instances Islam requires us to hold the truth if it is perceived as backbiting.
Also, in the case where a person is on the truth and argues with a fool who never admits his falsehood then it would be "right" and Islamically sanctioned to agree with the fool or at least move away and avoid his argument, despite being on the truth.
We have a good sense Alhumdulillah of comparative goods and bads and it is this faculty that we should utilise to determine the RIGHT course of action. So with respect to this to kill generally is Wrong but in some cases it will be Right ...
Just to clarify why I called 'Right' and 'Wrong' absolutes when it is obvious that killing is both right and wrong. It is because given the situation there is a specific right and a specific wrong provided one can evaluate all possible options with a clear head, there will always be priority of "value".
Even if it comes down to two equally "valued" choices the preferred choice i.e. the one taken due to "taste" will be the right choice because we will be utilising our sense of "desire" to evaluate better and worse. So Islam sanctions desire only if it does not breach requirements.
In fact ... There is a pecking order :
Fard outweighs the Mustahab
Mustahab outweighs the Muba
Avoiding haram outweighs the avoiding Makruh
Avoiding Makruh outweighs the Muba
But because harm shoud be avoided
Avoiding Haram outweighs Enjoing of Fard
and Avoiding Makruh outweighs Enjoing Mustahab
We shoul understand that if there are two goods as the only choices available then the Shaitan will take pleasure in making us do the lesser of the two !!!
Re: right / wrong ?
and so we have to be so very careful in everything that we do.
thanks, brother psyah.
great explicative.
best,
Dushwari