Is good always right?

Answer 1

Is bad always wrong? Sometimes it isn't easy to determine the rightness or wrongness of what appears good or bad until way after the fact. It's often in retrospection that we see most clearly. What might appear as good could be wrong if looked at in a wider perspective. A simple example could be that it's good to allow people free will but it's wrong if they hurt a lot of people in the process. It's good to let our children try new things but wrong to allow them to endanger themselves or others in the process.

Answer 2

In English and philosophy, the categories of "good" or "bad" are much broader than "right" and "wrong". Right and wrong are strictly related to matters of ethical or rational choice, whereas good and bad are broader value judgments most often related to function. For example, a "good" knife is not therefore a "right" knife, because the claim may have nothing to do with choice. In general something is "good" if, choice aside, it functions normatively well. So Pete can be a "good" card cheat.

However, in matters of choice, depending on the context, a "right" choice is either one that in the context is considered, ethically or rationally, either adequate or optimal. So Bush may well have been the "wrong" choice for President of the US. In the context of a chess match, moving the bishop to check the king may decisively be the "right" move in the context of the other choices. Whereas, in terms of stragetic rationality, killing a bank guard may have been the "right" move in terms of getting away with the crime, but a "wrong" choice in terms of choosing actions that respect fairness, justice, and valuing the happiness and well-being of others as being on par with your own - i.e., in terms of ethics.

So how does right and wrong tie into good and bad? In the context of viewing a person or and agent as functioning well either rationally or ethically, a "right" action becomes a "good" choice or act. Hence the "right" bishop move that resulted in victory, is also a "good" move in terms of commenting on how well the player is functioning as chess player. A "good" chessplayer can sometimes make a "bad" move, but can never always or most of the time make bad moves. Making a strategically wrong move is "bad" because it derivatively contributes or tends to support the claim that the player is a bad or poor player.

The same is true of ethical judgments: right or wrong choices or actions in terms of strategically promoting the ends and values of ethics in the abstract, become good or bad actions insofar as one is commenting on the ethical functioning of the agent making the choices.

So in the context of commenting on the ethical or rational functioning of a person, good acts = right acts, and bad acts = wrong acts on some basic level.

Note, in the real world stories are often more complicated. So perhaps a certain bishop move for many years was considered by the experts as being the right and rational best move, but then a flaw in this strategy was discovered, making it the wrong move in this wider context. You can then have a complicated liguistic context in which someone can meaningfully claim that Pete made the "wrong" move even though it was in some sense the "right" choice. But with the basic understanding outlined above, all of these confusions can be untangled.

Answer 3

We each struggle over choices, good vs bad, right vs wrong... What we are trying to do is make the best choice which produces the most favorable outcome. Although one thing I’d like people to understand is no matter the choice we’ve made, no matter the outcome of that choice, it was in fact the right choice. Everything in life does happen the way it’s supposed to. I can honestly say that I have no regrets in life. I say this because even the so called ‘bad’ choices have brought me to where I presently am. It is all of our choices, good and bad that have made us who we are. Some people look at this philosophy and say “So what’s the point in making choices then if either way is right?” In fact, you are making a choice to NOT make a choice.

Answer 4

Nope. Sly and being manipulative are considered not good but then again if you don't have them at all, you'll always be cheated or something like that by other people. So, it's not right. Well, you know what I mean... there're always grey in everything(or at least most of 'em).

Answer 5

You asked the Wrong Question .. It is :
Is Right Always Good ??
Answer This and you will find your answer too

Answer 6

This is one of those context things. The way you have asked the question suggests that you are asking a moral question. To phrase it a different way, "Should we always seek to do what is good (or right or moral)?"

The answer is, "Yes."

Answer 7

Being good with the good is right.Being good with our offenders,cheaters and antisocials is not right.Easop tale goes like this.A serpent wanted to be good.He stopped biting people.Slowly people realised tht this serpent is too good to bite.They considered him as harmless and fearlessly moved about.Then kids playing around started hitting him stones,kicking him,injuring to death.If u have venom in u,preserve it for ur safety.

Answer 8

'Good' is more subjective than 'right' and 'right' is more objective than 'good'. A right answer is not always right and a right answer is not always good.

Answer 9

I would say they are synonymous. To do good, means to do the right action, but I suppose it depends on your definitions of good and right.

Answer 10

no!! there is a right time for everything, and if time doesn't require this what you called 'good' thing well, the word 'right' would not exist as the IDENTITY of that what you called 'GOOD'.