The question of good has traversed the ages, prompting diverse and often contradictory reflections. What is good, and how can we define it? Across ages, cultures, and even individuals, this notion has taken different forms. While it is widely accepted that good is an essential value of ethics, it is pertinent to ask whether it is truly absolute or simply relative.

● Good and Evil: Relative Concepts

It is important to realize that the words "good" and "evil" are merely labels. They represent concepts that we associate with moral realities, but they can vary greatly depending on the context. If the theory of parallel universes exists, it is entirely conceivable that there are worlds where what we consider evil is perceived positively, and vice versa. In this sense, good and evil are not absolutes: they depend on the meanings assigned to them by each society, culture, or era.

Take a simple example: in some ancient civilizations, human sacrifice was seen as good, a means to appease the gods and ensure the prosperity of the community. Today, such practices would be deemed barbaric and cruel. This simple example illustrates that what we consider good or bad is shaped by our era, beliefs, and social values.

● Good as a Promoter of Positive Emotions

But if good is relative, how can we attempt to define it? An interesting avenue is to associate good with positive emotions. All humans appreciate joy, happiness, and comfort. Thus, doing good could consist of provoking these emotions in others. Helping someone in need or offering support is often considered good acts because they bring well-being to those who benefit from them. By promoting these positive emotions, we strive to create a world where everyone can experience a certain level of happiness.

However, this approach to good has its limits. What about situations where the well-being of one person leads to the suffering of another? The pursuit of happiness can sometimes conflict with justice or equity, forcing us to reconsider what we think is "good."

● Good as a Question of Perspective

The notion of good cannot be absolute, as it depends on the viewpoint of the one acting and that of the one suffering the consequences. An action may be perceived as good by one person, as it generates positive emotions for themselves or for those they wish to help. Yet, the same action may cause suffering to another person and thus be perceived as bad.

Consider a concrete example: a political decision that, according to its supporters, aims to improve society may have negative consequences for certain populations. In the eyes of the decision-makers, this decision is good because it responds to an ideal of progress. However, those who suffer the negative effects may see it as unjust and therefore bad. Both perspectives are valid, as good and evil are felt subjectively, depending on one's experience and position. This illustrates that there is no absolute definition of good: what is good for one individual may be bad for another, and each is correct from their viewpoint. This relativity is central to any ethical discussion, as it invites us to recognize the plurality of experiences and avoid overly harsh judgments.

● Pain as a Universal Criterion for Evil

On the other hand, there seems to be a more universal criterion for defining evil: pain. Whether physical or emotional, pain is an experience that no one wishes to endure. In this sense, evil could be defined as anything that causes unnecessary suffering. Torture, betrayal, or humiliation are almost universally considered evils because they cause suffering to others.

However, some philosophies, such as Stoicism, encourage transcending pain to make it a means of personal growth. In these cases, pain is no longer simply an evil to avoid, but a tool for self-improvement. This complicates the idea of an absolute definition of evil, but it does not negate the validity of the universally rejected experience of pain.

● Conclusion

Ultimately, good and evil are not fixed or absolute concepts. They vary according to context, culture, era, and even individuals. Yet, we can attempt to understand them through relative criteria such as positive emotions and pain. If we seek to do good, it might consist of promoting joy

What do you think ?