Some thoughts:



It's necessary to distinguish between behavioral goodness, experiential goodness, and structural goodness.

Both behavioral goodness and experiential goodness cannot be verified as proof of goodness, because the pleasure derived from behaviors and experiences may manifest as a form of appeasement and manipulation, which is absolutely not a sufficient condition for proving goodness. Any concrete behavior may be falsified as non-goodness within a broader relational structure.

Therefore, the judgment of goodness in speech and action possesses unidirectionality: we can identify signals and structures that deviate from goodness through speech, behavior, and experience, yet we cannot verify the realization of goodness from speech, behavior, and experience.

Thus, the necessary condition for goodness is not the goodness of emotion or behavior, but the non-harmful and non-dominating nature of structure. Whether it is sadness in emotion or separation in action, as long as a relationship does not lead toward domination, manipulation, and harm, but instead promotes the freedom and growth of life, we have reason to define that this relationship has realized goodness.
查看原文
此頁面可能包含第三方內容,僅供參考(非陳述或保證),不應被視為 Gate 認可其觀點表述,也不得被視為財務或專業建議。詳見聲明
  • 打賞
  • 留言
  • 轉發
  • 分享
留言
請輸入留言內容
請輸入留言內容
暫無留言