8
NO GOOD
WITHOUT EVIL: Just take a look at the history of philosophy, at the number of
philosophers from Plato to Kant who have designated men as either good or evil
without apparently realizing that a 'good man' or a 'bad man' can never exist,
never, that is, so long as men are compelled to conform to their individual
standards of polar exchange, which is to say so long as they live.
Naturally, certain men appear good
compared with lesser men, whose basic intellectual limitations, social
hardships, and poor breeding lead them to commit actions which a more fortunate
individual could only condemn. But this
is far from saying that those greater men are not susceptible to evils
themselves, and to evils, moreover, which conform to their class, occupation,
age, and physiological coercion as men.
No man can call himself good simply because
his higher intelligence, better standard of living, and finer breeding enable
him to refrain from what might broadly be described as the evil tendencies of a
lower class. It is not enough simply to avoid
torturing or murdering people, openly ridiculing, cursing, raping, or fighting
them; for one can usually do that without too great a strain upon oneself if
one is of a sufficiently independent and noble turn-of-mind.
No, to become a 'good man' one would have
to give-up reading certain books, say, murder mysteries; give-up listening to
certain albums, say, hard rock; give-up watching certain films, say, horror
videos; stop thinking certain thoughts, seeing certain people, taking certain
sides, having certain beliefs, saying certain things, feeling certain emotions,
dreaming certain dreams, indulging certain fantasies, etc., and one would have
to give them up and/or or stop them to such an extent, to such a point of
exclusivity, that there would be very little left one could do!
But would this drastic strategy for the
eradication of personal evil in one's life really make one good, holy,
saved? No, it wouldn't! For if one could get rid
of all one's evil inclinations, there would be nothing good to fall back on,
there would be no good left within oneself, since one's good inclinations only
thrive with the assistance of their opposites, not without them! One would simply exist in a manner
approximating to that in which certain Oriental sages have traditionally
aspired to existing: neither a good man nor a bad man but effectively a thing,
devoid of life, sitting under the branches of a tree all day with the
imperturbability of a rock.
Thus wherever the healthy tendency of a
will to life is concerned, there must always be
varying degrees of good and evil.
Conversely, wherever the unhealthy tendency of a will to antilife (death-in-life) is concerned, there can be neither
good nor evil but an existence betokening death - a sort of blasphemy against
life.