Wednesday, May 6, 2009

new definition?

It seems to me that the bastardization of the english language is well underway so why not take my own stab at it as I reveal my blog. My blog has its own newly created word combining two profound words which are too often isolated from each other when individuals make judgements or take action on judgements. Now a word may already exist that defines these two often ignored aspects of reasoning and conjecture. These together may be found to be an oxymoron as it relates to one's application of principals. But they shouldn't be.

The two are inexplicably linked within our motivations and where not linked in presentation they have to be forced apart. We spend less time in our western society it seems telling people what is right or wrong and more empowering in them an allowance to make up their own mind about what is right or wrong for them.

Go ahead pounce on the semantics of it all: right or wrong, permissable or forbidden, vogue or taboo, etc., etc., the list of actions and thier opposing 'antonym' is endless. Its not even about right or wrong, its about respecting the whole and getting that same respect in return.

The fact remains that we have justice systems whose applications are so tied down by individually liberties that they compromise any ability to consider the liberties of the masses in their application of morality. Yet we have justice systems that disregard indivdual liberties to such an extent that they would enforce death before they ever considered the reality of one homeless persons' plight.

So how do we ever become a peaceful species? How do we establish a universal morality when the definition of morality is not only devoid of pragmatism but culturally enforced? Tell me so I can begin to do my part.

No comments:

Post a Comment