2007-07-28 12:26:24 · 20 answers · asked by kickinupfunf 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
On the greater understanding of GOD then no. In the text of the dualistic reality that we exist then yes. Good and evil, hot cold, pleasure pain, in out, up down, without these extremes of measurement then we would not have the ability to understand either or any points in between.
2007-07-29 04:12:09 · answer #1 · answered by Beneplacitum 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not - a bad "guy" isn't necessary! What's perceived as good or bad doesn't have to be personified. The person that pulls other people out of a burning building will probably be regarded as a "good guy" - the flames consuming the building, however, are not a bad guy by any means . . . . . after all you would love them if you were making s'mores! :)
I think most of us would agree that a beautiful sunny day is a good thing for example . . . . nothing anthropomorphic there.
But I can definitely see what you are getting at. There is a little bit to the notion that we know things by contrast (while there are so many wavelengths of light that we could probably see quite well even without shadow, light does become far more visible as its own entity when paired with darkness . . . .).
However, I don't think contrast is the whole story here.
It has been convenient, historically speaking, to dichotomize things. If everything is either good or bad, right or wrong, etc. etc. - decisions are quick and simple. That's a very practical way to function - however, it's not always accurate, and over time those kinds of oversimplified thought processes can cause catastrophic problems. I'm sure to their own families and supporters members of the early KKK were heroes; the "good" guys - very few people would agree with that notion now (though there are still more than most of us would like to think). . . .
Ultimately, when you pare away everything else - culture, religion, philosophy and the rest - good and bad are just the simple, primal, even childish things they say they are. Not many of us want to fall into an active volcano (it would be a major inconvenience to our long term plans, a very baaaad thing!), but we would all love it if somebody gave us something we always wanted but couldn't get a hold of (how often do you hear about people refusing lottery winnings?).
I's the social logic that tries to maximize good outcomes for the most people and minimize bad outcomes to the most people that gets complicated and confusing (what's good for some people can be terrible for others - finding a balance isn't always easy, particularly when dealing with feelings and beliefs). Over time the things built from that logic (taboos, religions, laws and social norms) can take on a life of their own and even become "bad" for the issues they were meant to solve! So bad guys are useful tools for teaching examples, but they aren't necessary for people to do "good" (heck, theoretically someone can do good things for a culture that they won't even know about or accept for another hundred years, in that scenario the whole white hat black hat thing is totally useless).
Sorry about the long ramble, but I wanted to flesh out my point as clearly as I could!
2007-07-28 22:02:03 · answer #2 · answered by Jason S 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yep. Reference Aristotle's golden mean. The bad guy is the measuring stick for the good guy. If everyone acted good, then what is good would be normal or common. When we have a bad guy, we get to see who of the common steps up and plays the role of good guy. Its also a balance issue - the good guy can only be as good as the bad guy is bad. For example, if a cop arrests a kid who stole a twinkie (even if he's the greatest cop ever) we don't view him as much of a good guy as the cop who captures a serial murderer.
An interesting question - seems like you hope we could have good guys without bad guys. I'm afraid that might not be the case though.
2007-07-28 19:30:23 · answer #3 · answered by getinthepond 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes good is derived from bad. Bad is nothing good is something. Nothing precedes something. It is the good that is rare and the bad that is common. Bad gives rise to good. Good seems to be simply a high grade bad. Every good has some bad in it.
2007-07-28 23:17:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. "Good guys" are dubbed so for saving the world from the "bad guys" or being nice and polite in the face of adversity (metaphor for a bad guy).
2007-07-28 19:29:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only in the movies. Good and bad are really broad generalizations since I don't believe anyone is really all that good. It's more like; "the somewhat decent guy" vs the "the somewhat decent, but misguided guy" who wronged him.
We're all "good guys" and "bad guys" at one point or another.
'
2007-07-28 19:38:01 · answer #6 · answered by Big Blue 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"When people see things as beautiful,
ugliness is created.
When people see things as good,
evil is created."
"What is a good man but a bad man's teacher?
What is a bad man but a good man's job?"
--Tao Te Ching
in order to have a concept of something, we need the concept of its absence. We recognize the day because we realize that without it, there is the night. We have the concept of air, because we realize that in space, there is no air. And in the same way, we realize what good is, because in the absense of good, there is evil.
2007-07-28 19:51:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
So ultimately, if God exists, must Satan also exist?
My answer is no. I believe that it is possible to be "good" as compared to a norm without that norm being "bad". "Good" does not imply the existence of "bad: or "evil". It merely implies the exictence of not as good.
2007-07-28 19:40:53 · answer #8 · answered by Tom K 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No one is 100% bad nor is anyone 100% good, so no.
2007-07-28 19:36:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe so. How could you recognize what or who good is unless there was opposition?
2007-07-28 19:29:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋