After our class discussion this week (9/14) one thing that kept coming up in my head was the definition of good and evil. How would progressives and utopians define the word’s “good” and “evil” if not in the eyes of God or through His teachings? The whole progressive, communist and socialist ideology is based upon the idea that mankind will one day reach the pinnacle point of “goodness” where utopia will arise. Yet in any of the readings there are no definitions for what “goodness” really is or what “evils” need to be corrected in order for humans to transcend normalcy.
This may be more theological than sociological but the terms “good”, “evil” and “love” were all coined in religious context first as in a believers love for God. How then do you secularize those terms? What makes a person “good” in the eyes of progressive’s? Perhaps it is someone that thinks totally internally to progress society to the ultimate organization it can be. He who is good is looking out for the progression of mankind and the God-like nature of mankind. We gave several examples during class of people lying, stealing from and starving others for the “progression” of society. Was this considered “good” in the eyes of progressives? If those populations had never experienced those tribulations they would not be able to reach transcendence? There is quite a fine line between “good” and “evil” or right and wrong. Furthermore, without God, everyone’s definition of “good” and “evil” would be different. How would they account for that? Considering each individual is like their own God they could coin their own definition for good and evil and it could be completely different from that of another person.
In all this is a critical aspect of their argument and it contains some clear holes from my understanding.