|
a new way of looking at... philosophy >> good and bad vs. good and evil - 2 |
- info -
|
many of us today define ourselves in a mixture of both concepts, which nietzsche would call part of the first steps to get beyond good and evil. it is better to define yourself by what you are, however. why, you ask? how would you define a table? if you defined it by what it's not, then you could be here forever. it's not a rock. it's not a tree. it's not the sky. if you define it by what it is, then a table is a flat surface supported from the ground by legs the equally distribute the weight.
to relate it to the concept of good in terms of good and evil, when one calls him or herself a good person, it shouldn't be in terms of what they don't do. to say you are good because you don't smoke, don't drink, don't kill people, etc... is not as strong a definition for your "goodness" as to say, "i perform charitable works" or "i always treat everyone fairly". you strengthen your position of being good by what you are, not by what you aren't. nietzsche's concept of good and bad is actually a nice way of representing both sides, by simply defining yourself by your inherent characteristics, and not how you compare yourselves to others. good and evil lends itself to defining ourselves with a weaker position. therefore, you should begin to define yourself in terms of what you are, not what you are not. 1 | 2 |