1/16/2001, Jay Fenello wrote to FixGov: > Is it possible to have good without evil? Good question. Here are some thoughts about how that might relate to our issues... And Jay, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this question. --- Perceptually, there can be no light without dark. That is, we need to know moral contrasts before we can perceive a 'moral dimension' or 'act morally'. Psychologically, there is no way we are going to 'educate out the evil' in people's minds. We all experience times when we feel like killing someone, or are tempted to 'get by with' something that might benefit us in the short term. --- Any 'future utopia' which does not recognize these things will either (1) never happen, or (2) be based on denial. And 'denial' by society always translates into suppression and / or geneocide of those who - by their existence - contradict the belief in 'perfection'. Thus in some Communist countries dissidents have been considered 'enemies of the state' - they contradict the doctrine about how socialism is supposed to 'transform the individual'. --- Fortunately, however, a livable world is achievable without losing the experience of moral contrast, and without denying or suppressing the 'darker' aspects of human nature. Childhood is that wonderful time when we all get to play out our darker sides, and find out the kind of trouble it gets us into. To put it in over-simplified sexist terms: boys form gangs and get into fights. Girls experience the full range of social expression, with cliques and lies and exclusions, etc. Here in Ireland I notice that the kids are encouraged to play out these games / learning experiences. They are given guidance and feedback, but they aren't strictly punished or made to 'feel evil' when they come home with bloody noses and angry notes from teachers. As a result, the kids grow naturally through these phases, and the adult civil society in Ireland is a remarkable civil one, with lots of teasing, but very little real anger and very little violence. By contrast, in Victorian England - where little boys and girls were expected to be models of virtue - you had one of the most morally poisoned of adult societies. Instead of being 'worked through', the infantile dark-side was preserved, and it dominated adult society. In some sense then, the 'dark side' of humanity can be worked through in childhood. Grown-ups don't need to go around suppressing their aggression and anger, they've outgrown it - they've learned more successful ways to relate and achieve. If children are given liberty, within a supportive framework, then they can grow up into adults who can live in both harmony and liberty with their neighbors. If people experience the 'moral contrasts' in childhood - in themselves and others - and together they learn to get along, then as adults they don't need lots of 'playground monitors' (laws and cops) to force them to 'get along'. --- In addition, society can be set up so there are useful outlets for such passions as competition, and aggrandizement, and leadership. There are societal tasks which require those kinds of energies. Instead of denying them as 'wrong', or worshipping them as 'virtues', they can be rationally employed as 'skills'. Just as you wouldn't use a hammer to turn a screw, so you wouldn't let a 'leader' run the affairs of a community. Leaders are for projects like building bridges. Communities are not projects, they are living organisms, deserving of liberty. all the best, rkm
