Good and Evil.

Any sensible person is considered capable of distinguishing good and evil. Can we really distinguish good and evil?

When a person kills another for no apparent reason, or unacceptable reason in social judgment, it seems clear that she acted poorly. But if that same person kills thousands of "enemies" will be consecrated and honored for outstanding services rendered to the country.

If an impoverished man steals to survive, he did something wrong. When, however, the driver of the economic policy of a country achieves excellent results, engendering poverty in other countries, he is highly praised.
 
In general, human groups set rules to define good and evil, these rules are arising from the way of being, thinking and acting of this group, ie, from its culture, from the point of view of anthropology.

Thus, when an Eskimo kills his aged father, with the justification that it should not become too weakened because it would harm the eternal life, he did well, according to the thinking of these people, who, for reasons of survival, not can keep unproductive people.

When the family authorizes to be disconnected the apparatus that keeps alive, suffering, a loved one, with no prospect of recovery, this can be accepted as a charitable and justifiable act, but will be condemned for religious reasons.

It seems clear that we must accept that good and evil are relative concepts rather than absolute. And are relative, because they depend on point of view, i.e., the view, from a point.

Trial and punishment.

The difficulty of defining what is objectively good or evil does not prevent a social organization establish their rules of social behavior. What is needed is to keep in mind that these rules are set by people, as a result of social conditioning and which are temporary, because what is sentenced today can be accepted tomorrow, and so too the opposite. These rules were content and questioned.

Be aware of the relativity of good and evil is very useful for us to avoid taking on the role of judges, eager to apply punishments. Even because the punishment can be the easy way for someone to be not really punished. It is very common for people who have acted to harm others when socially punished, feel liberated from the burden of guilt, because they have already completed their sentences. Not for any other reason that is evolving in order to punish someone, forcing to do something to correct the social harm caused, not just apply a temporal and unproductive shame we did not redeem anything, but, on the contrary, is still more onerous.

The origin of evil.

Let's try go to the source of the evil. Imagine a fetus in the pregnancy process. By definition we consider the innocent newborns. If we are all born innocent, why some become criminals?

One might think that is a bad character, but if so, the innocent would have been born to be criminal and, in fact, would not have responsibility, because had no opportunity of choice.

We may do not accept this genetic determinism, but we will have to assign to education that received the innocent, or to the environment, the responsibility for the fact of having become a criminal. Again it is unfair to blame someone for the education received, or the environment where he lives. The possibility of coexistence of the two factors gives no truth to each, much less to the whole.

A third hypothesis of the innocent to have come into this world marked to be what in reality he become, ie, a criminal, and that determinism was established by himself as "consciousness" which adopted a human body. This hypothesis contradicts the fact that only the harmonic energy is recorded in the "individualized consciousness".

Finally, we can imagine that the person within their free will, has decided to become a criminal. Would be a person bad, even though genetically well-formed, and having had a blameless education. Corroborating this hypothesis, there are numerous cases of criminals whose brothers are good people. That is, take yourself a criminal is the free will. The crux of the matter is if the evil can be a choice freely assumed by one person.

Only in this case we would consider someone guilty for acting badly . Surely it would be simpler and more convenient, assign to free will the responsibility, but it does not exist and it is easy to prove, as it is easy to identify the cause of problem.

How could avoid evil?

Our social structure based on guilt and responsibility, has not worked. Never we live with so much violence. Virtually all of us are prisoners of a violent and irresponsible society, determined by collective behavior.

When we walk the streets and identify social problems, our reaction is to turn your back, because we think it does not concern us. After all, we pay taxes and we argue that governments should take responsibility for these social misfits.

People employed in conventional administrations are treated as children and not as responsible adults. The irony is that, even so, thousands of others want to receive this treatment because they are unemployed.

We keep in prisons thousands of other people who have committed crimes related to petty theft, and we have greater tolerance to important persons who stole much. Justice really is blind, it does not see the injustices committed in their name.

We maintain many privileged that are distracted making speeches and generating useless laws, when what they should do is to solve social problems. They transform the mandate on business desk.

We accept absurd wage distortions, paying these privileged with funds raised by taxes pay by the poor, when they consume products essential.

We live with corruption accepting this as inevitable. For us it is a fait accompli and we respect the offender as someone who deserves our admiration for to be rich.

In fact, we are very unjust and we pay for this injustice. In a world based on injustice is too easy to someone to take antisocial behavior. In fact, the behavior of this individual is not a cream, or atavistic responsibility, but a consequence of an absurd social structure. He was a just world, surely his misconduct would be much less bearable and the society. Ourselves is that we create a society, ie, the medium from which arise the social aberrations.

The wave of violence that afflicts and torments our social life is generated by ourselves. Nobody is so discrepant from a social order. Are distortions of social structure generating the unacceptable behavior.