Word
Gems
What is a
man but the sum of his thoughts?
- Mortimer Adler's
- Syntopicon
Essays
Good
& Evil:
Editor's
1-minute essay
The term "good," generally speaking, is used for things we
desire, things offering the possibility of pleasure.
- What we call "good" is an object of our
desires.
We use the word "good" in different contexts:
(1) Economics: goods are commodities, things bought and
sold having "use" or "exchange value."
(2) Politics: we speak of a "good society" or
a "good government," by which we often mean to say that they are
"just."
(3) Ethics: in this field of morality and human conduct, we say a
"good life" is a "happy life"; a "good man"
is a "virtuous man" (while the term "good" can apply to man, it can
also be used to describe anything in the universe; however, the terms "right"
and "wrong" properly apply only to human actions).
(4) Metaphysics [an investigation of ultimate reality]: here, we
use good to describe degrees of perfection. We do this in a general way, in
effect, constantly rating everything "good," "better," or
"best." When we say "good coffee," "good
weather," or "good movie," we imply that we have known
"bad" or "less good" versions of all of these. This rating system can
be used for everything from the quark particle, the lowliest essence of reality, on up the
goodness-scale to God himself, one of ultimate and infinite being and perfection. (God is
also referred to as "good" in terms of "virtue," # 3, above.)
Further, the "good" may also be seen as that object of desire
which we want to possess, do, or become. Ontological goodness, becoming
the good, intrinsic perfection, is goodness at its highest, the grandest expression
of which is God himself. (The English term, "God," derives from "good"
and suggests "Infinite Goodness.")
Evil may be viewed as the negative counterpart of each of the above
three states of goodness. It is common to see evil in terms of untoward actions,
as the good left undone; but evil can also be construed as a failure to possess
the good and to become the good. This distinction is seen in the biblical Lucifer
who, while maintaining his (good) exalted state of being and ontological perfection of
existence, became Satan, one who performs (evil) not the good.
Editor's note: See my Personal Statement #42
for discussion on Satan as a mythic entity.
- Is "the good" just a matter of opinion? -- or
is it related to truth, that which is objectively real?
Many say that "the good" is something subjective, something
based on opinion that changes with the times; is it true, as Hamlet said, that only our
thinking makes something good -- but to the next person it may be bad?
Some of the great teachers assert that "the good" is something
objective, that is, something in the object itself, apart from how we may feel about it;
that "the good" does not change with the times nor with the shifting opinions of
people.
Socrates said that, because of man's nature (predisposed toward
"the good"), no one ever willfully seeks evil; that man always seeks "the
good"; that, even when he does evil, he finds a way to justify his actions,
convincing himself (if no one else) that he has performed "the good."
- If man always seeks "the good" -- yet does evil
-- obviously he is, at times, mistaken regarding the nature of "the good."
When we say that man desires "the good" we mean that the
object of his desire, he believes, will offer to him some form of pleasure and
satisfaction.
- But if he can be mistaken in this regard, "the
good" he desires may be, in fact, only apparent and not real.
"Apparent goods" are those things we
consciously desire, things we deem to be desirable, that is, things we believe will offer
us satisfaction -- but are, in fact, things that will harm us or, at best, may distract us
from the real good. "Apparent goods" represent our wants, are
subjective in nature, vary according to individual tastes and are a matter of opinion. Not
all "apparent goods" are harmful and the well-ordered life allows for a measure
of them, as long as "real goods" are not neglected.
"Real goods" are those things that we may or
may not consciously desire -- but ought to or should desire. They
represent our true needs as human beings -- even if we haven't yet learned to want
them. "Real goods" conform to our natural desires, needs common to all human
beings. "Real goods" are objective in nature and do not vary with time or
culture.
The concept of "real goods" is based on Aristotle's comment on
"right desire"; that is, desires that we either have or should have
because we are human beings.
For example, knowledge is a "real good" because humans are
rational creatures and have the capacity to be educated; as such, they require knowledge
and education -- for them it is a natural "right" and is a natural
"desire" -- and even if an individual, because of disadvantaged environment or
other circumstance, does not consciously desire education, he or she ought to
desire it because it relates to his or her capacity and potential as a human being.
- Mortimer Adler says that there are not a great number of
"real goods" -- possibly less than a dozen -- but these are common to all people
of all times and all cultures; they are not a matter of taste or opinion but conform to
the essence of what it means to be human.
According to Dr. Adler, "real goods," relating to man's needs,
are found in four categories:
(1) External goods: a measure of economic wealth and
"goods."
(2) Bodily goods: those goods relating to the sustaining of
physical life; food, shelter, clothing, health, pleasure, sleep.
(3) Social goods: a social creature, man requires friends; also,
a safe, just, and free society in which to live.
(4) Goods of the soul: knowledge, virtue, wisdom, truth, God.
- A person can want too much -- more than he or
she needs. And one can want things that one should not have. But no one
ever needs too much -- or needs that which is harmful!
Dr. Adler points out that, of the above categories, it is only #4 over
which we have any true control in this world.
In fact, #4, those moral goods relating to character and inner freedom,
must be sought and claimed before the first three categories -- called "goods of
fortune (or circumstance)" -- may be won, if at all. The possession of the first
three are largely a matter of chance or luck, and they can be, and often are, lost by
those who have them. Only the "goods of the soul" remain truly our own and are
under our control.
- Of these four categories of "real goods," what
is the greatest good in life? This "good" will not just be a means to something
else but is the goal or the end of human striving!
History's philosophers have had a special word for the "greatest
good" in life -- the Summum Bonum. The "greatest good" is what we
call happiness. In fact, true happiness is not to be viewed simply as a
good, not just a means to another good, but something sought for its own sake; it may even
be seen as the sum total of all satisfactions.
For example, if one is asked, "Why do you want ... wealth ...
friends ... health?" (or anything else that could be mentioned), the answer will
always be something that means "because I want to be happy!"
But if one asks the question "Why do you want to be happy?"
there is no response other than "because I want to be happy!" In other
words, there is no goal beyond happiness for which we strive because happiness includes
all other satisfactions.
In a sense, all of the lesser goods are sought for their "exchange
value"; we don't really want them for their own sake, but only for their ability to
gain for us something else!
- Happiness is the only good we seek as an end in itself,
not merely as a means to get something else -- it is the ultimate good.
When Jefferson wrote of "the pursuit of happiness" he
was not referring to a pleasant psychological state of mind; he used the term in its
classic sense, meaning all truly good things.
Editor's note: See my
Personal Statement
#67 (written ten years after this "Editor's
Essay") for a more complete discussion on the nature of good
and evil.
|