Music Philosophy Art Math Chess Programming and much more ...
"Good and evil must coexist, and man must choose."
— Mahatma Gandhi
Isn't it wrong to do good for any kind of benefit, be it rewards in the afterlife, good feelings, prestige, or good karma, to name a few examples? In my opinion, authentic ethics, unlike religious ethics, entails doing good for the sake of good itself, not for one's own particular benefits, no matter what they are. How often does it happen that someone does good to consider themselves a "good person"? Or does good to achieve salvation? Are we interested in such ethics? Isn't it hypocritical? Are we capable of selfless doing good? Maybe yes, maybe no; it's hard to be objective on this matter. Even if not, the goal is to strive to achieve such goodness within oneself, or in philosophical terms, goodness as a value in itself, an autotelic value.
However, let’s focus on the motives that drive us when we do good. Do we do good because we expect reciprocity, or selflessly? Doesn't our idea of being a good person include doing good? And while we're on this topic, wouldn't you ask: what's wrong with doing good for internal or external benefits? I would ask: what is good about doing good for one's own benefits? Shouldn't moral behavior be selfless? I think it should. Therefore, donating money to the sick, the poor, adopting stray animals, or helping the elderly is good as long as it is selfless and not because it brings us any benefits, whether material or "spiritual." However, our culture has not yet matured to selflessly do good; we still pollute the environment, wage wars, consume material goods without restraint, and behave selfishly. I am not a moralist to condemn others and consider myself better than them, but I am one of those people who act irrationally. Each of us can find faults within ourselves, as none of us is perfect.
However, there are also cases where a person does evil selflessly. Just recall totalitarian regimes where evil is law. For example, does Putin have any real interest in waging wars? You might say yes. I agree, but in this case, his malevolent actions go beyond his interest, as killing innocent civilians is doing evil for the sake of evil. Therefore, Putin can be called the antichrist. Putin does evil selflessly, for the sake of evil, much like Stalin and Hitler did. They aimed for absolute evil. Similarly, Islamic terrorists, by attacking the World Trade Center, condemned thousands of innocent people to death in the name of a misunderstood religion. No religion, be it Christianity, Judaism, or Islam, should propagate crime.
If I said that the source of all evil is religion, I would be both right and wrong because religion has its positive and negative aspects. The world is not black and white, which we must remember. We could not talk about good without mentioning its opposite, evil, but the main topic is selflessly doing good. Are we aware that our actions influence reality? If so, shouldn't we do good for the sake of good itself? Are we capable of being true altruists? There are probably individual cases of people helping others without expecting any benefit. Shouldn't we take them as examples and try to do something good for others? As Leo Tolstoy stated: "To love means to do good."
However, our culture has not yet matured to selflessly do good; we still pollute the environment, wage wars, consume material goods without restraint, and behave selfishly. I am not a moralist to condemn others and consider myself better than them, but I am one of those people who act irrationally. Each of us can find faults within ourselves, as none of us is perfect.
However, there are also cases where a person does evil selflessly. Just recall totalitarian regimes where evil is law. For example, does Putin have any real interest in waging wars? You might say yes. I agree, but in this case, his malevolent actions go beyond his interest, as killing innocent civilians is doing evil for the sake of evil. Therefore, Putin can be called the antichrist. Putin does evil selflessly, for the sake of evil, much like Stalin and Hitler did. They aimed for absolute evil. Similarly, Islamic terrorists, by attacking the World Trade Center, condemned thousands of innocent people to death in the name of a misunderstood religion. No religion, be it Christianity, Judaism, or Islam, should propagate crime.
If I said that the source of all evil is religion, I would be both right and wrong because religion has its positive and negative aspects. The world is not black and white, which we must remember. We could not talk about good without mentioning its opposite, evil, but the main topic is selflessly doing good. Are we aware that our actions influence reality? If so, shouldn't we do good for the sake of good itself? Are we capable of being true altruists? There are probably individual cases of people helping others without expecting any benefit. Shouldn't we take them as examples and try to do something good for others? As Leo Tolstoy stated: "To love means to do good."