A Chaotic Look At The World

Our own consistent thought processes are invariably the same thing as the thought processes that came before us and the ones that should follow after. If the abstraction of thought is only one part of the world we are fit to see, then perhaps the thoughts of another system of being is exactly what would drive us to feeling something in another realm of possibility. 

Let's break it down like this. If our world is full of devious people who are only fit to see themselves as greater than another, then perhaps the world must change to be full of a better people. But if we take that view then we must encounter the inherent disabling idea of altruism in our own minds and hearts. If the world is set up for good works to be rewarded, then is anything altruistic? And on the same token, if someone believes their works to be altruistic then are we really seeing a world full of selfish and diabolical thoughts of helping the world, even if that world is overtaken by the idea we are “good”?

I’ve always wondered about this certain thought in the human psyche. If we can convince ourselves of something, then is it too destructive of a thought to say Hitler thought himself a “good man”. If our world is so set apart from any sort of morality, at least in the general sense, was Hitler “bad”? Now don’t take that sentence out of context; if you do then my writing career would be over. And I would be set to rot in the bleak and desolate world of finance. But, for the sake of this experiment, let’s evaluate what makes someone “bad” or “good” and in that same token, who has the license to decide that. 

I would first like to look through this lens of idea. I describe myself as a Christian, and in saying that I think I have found a basis or north star of morality that I can chase. I do, however, understand that it would be disingenuous of myself to claim that all Christians are “good people” and those who describe themselves as not a christian are inherently evil or bad. I don’t necessarily agree with that premise on its own. There is the dichotomy however of us chasing an ideal in how we live our lives. If the world is set up for people to understand good and evil in our lives, then who are we to decide what is good and what is evil.

I wrote about this idea in my essay about Capital Punishment. I came to the conclusion in that essay that we as humans are not fit to make a decision on whether or not someone should die as a result of their sins. In the same token though, I understand that isn’t realistic in our world today. We make judgments on whether someone is good or evil based on the simplest things. Did they use their blinker when they turned left? Did they hold the door open for me as I was rushing out? These simple decisions people make influence how everyone else sees them. And in looking simply at those ideas, I’ve found that we cannot isolate the idea of “good” and the idea of “bad” into categories based upon our own religious beliefs. It isn’t fit for us to decide whether someone should die in hell, they make that decision on their own. As a christian I should not condemn someone to death because of their beliefs, I might not agree with it, but in the same vein of thought, it isn’t my job to police someone’s decisions. 

I hope that was written clearly enough to describe my thoughts on this complex topic. 

It would seem proud of me to not jump back into the idea I laid forth when I said don’t cancel me for saying this. The idea of Hitler being evil. I would first like to say. YES, HITLER WAS EVIL. He was the scourge of humanity, he is, and with good chances to follow, will continue to be one of the most despicable and evil men to ever live on this earth. But, I would like to look at him through a certain thought process. 

Hitler must have believed himself to be good. And he convinced millions that his beliefs were inherently good. That topic of discussion in how we understand whether something is right or wrong or if something is evil is so deceptive in how we view the world itself. Is Hitler believing himself to be good and Hitler convincing millions that he was good, something we should look at and possibly think, maybe he was “good”? NO, it’s not giving us that license. One of the craziest things about this now, is that nearly everyone understands Hitler was evil. And anyone who gives credence to what he thought is laughed at and mocked and thought to be from the devil himself. But in the purpose of thinking about this topic, can we clearly decide whether or not something is good or bad simply based upon whether the populace decides something is good or bad?

I don’t think understanding evil should be left to the masses. If the masses in Germany thought Hitler was good, who are we to say we could not become something similar? I don’t think we will, but who are we to say that something terrible and horrific in thought will be chased down and put to pass by the system we have in place? These are all rhetorical questions that have no basis in reality, but the point I’m trying to make here is that we can ask these questions. We can question whether someone was good. And if someone was bad.(Hitler was definitely a bad person.)

I wrote these 970 words to be a lead into what I think is a pressing issue in our world today. We declare people to be good and evil way too easily. We put labels on people who don’t deserve the attention. We put praise on people for things they don’t deserve praise for. And I thought that if I wanted to evaluate why that was happening in our culture today it would be beneficial to understand the pressing issues that have plagued our world for millennia. Devising ideals that we press towards is something that our culture chases. 

In order to understand what I’m speaking to here, I’d like to present some examples. 

Kanye West. I would like to preface this by saying the dude is a musical genius in a sense. He’s a marketing genius. He understands art in a way few do. But, why do we feel the need to call him a Nazi and such when we know that he is not all there mentally. He has spoken at length about his mental health;and crafting a complex narrative about his life in a manner that befits the things he has created is so invariably difficult that because of his recent outbursts we have seemed to chalk him off as a “crazy person” in a sense. And yet we still care when he says something outlandish. We still listen when he puts out music. And we still call him crazy. Why? Why do we care? His music has transcended the state of thought that most people stay in. He has created a world of music that wasn’t available before, and we can praise him for that. But we don’t have to listen to the man anymore, just listen to the musician. They can be two different people. As evidenced by his bi-polar diagnosis. Simply put, we don’t have to put labels on a person who doesn’t need them. Someone who has given himself enough. Someone without the proper labels to fit what he has done. So why should we try to label him? 

To keep these examples going it would be beneficial to look at the most controversial and talked about person of the last decade. Donald Trump. 

Donald Trump is a man who states his mind. And although I don’t agree with how he speaks, and in the manner in which he speaks, or even most of the things he says, he understands how to convince people of things. Otherwise he wouldn’t have been elected President. He speaks in a manner that most people now don’t. He’s fiery. He states his mind with no thought in the world for what the blowback might be. And in that sense I respect him. Granted, the words he uses can often be construed as derogatory or inflammatory, and for that I can’t. Yet, oftentimes in these heated moments in which he says things, the blowback from opposing viewpoints is that of name calling. Calling him a dictator when he was in office. Calling him a Nazi, or a white supremacist. For those attacks I would like to call out one of them in particular that makes no logical sense at all. How can a man who was voted out of office be a dictator? How in the United States of America can the people in power, in the senate and house, call him a Dictator while he is in office and face no repercussions, like being thrown in jail, if he was a dictator? The logical incoherence here boggles my mind, and yet it’s the world we live in. Resorting to calling a man who has his terrible deeds by names, instead of debunking his statements and calling attention to his logical fallacies is such a low blow in the standards of conversation. If the world knew of the dangers that could pose to our future, we would be frightened. I don’t want to sound like Orwell here, but we can’t resort to personal attacks when the person is an idiot who most likely doesn’t understand the words he utters. 

In a simple manner these thoughts will be concluded soon. The world we live in is utterly chaotic. If we resort to labeling people by words the masses have no consistent framework to fully understand, then why should we do such a thing? Resorting to simplistic and stupid personal attacks create a falsehood of the self that we should be countering with facts and logic. If the world we live in is built by the hands of people who believe their own godliness then we are in for a heap of trouble. If the world is simplistically frightened of opposing thoughts, that instead of breaking those arguments into logistical issues, we push forth by calling names and putting the falsity of their own thoughts in the limelight, then why should we ever grow as a people.

I’d like to finish this by looking back at the beginning of this article. When I spoke about people using their own beliefs to inform how they look at “good” and “evil”. We must have a north star if we are to come to any sort of agreement in this world. The consistent issue of conflict is people not aligning in how they see the world, or at least not respecting the others. In crafting a world where we all understand that Hitler was evil, and yet we can still understand the fact that he believed himself to be good; while also understanding the people who fell for his traps were normal people, then we can fully grasp the pain through which the world moves about. In a simple manner, the world doesn’t have a true north star for all. Mine is Christianity, but if the world doesn’t have one, then the society we have set up will eventually burn. It’s chaotic to think about, and these moments pale in comparison to the end of civilization, but perhaps that's the fear we should all be open to. Instead of fearing others thoughts, we should fear the destruction of thought itself. The north star from society doesn’t need to force everyone to be Christian, or any religion for that matter, but if we can come to the consensus that people need to hold something greater than the self to be the overriding force in the world then we will be a lot better off. Crafting a society that is conducive to understanding that we as humans are flawed and that we as humans don’t have all the answers is the society that will thrive. We can’t act as if the world is owned by us, or that it was created by us. No matter your beliefs we can’t say that if we are being honest people. So, with that in mind, that’s all folks.