Avatar of Jeanne

by

wrong and right

October 30, 2012 in Uncategorized

Who isn’t acquainted with the eternal unresolved idea “how can something so right be so wrong?”  Well, that’s easy.  It’s an ethical question meant to be answered simply, meant to appeal to reason by way of conscience (as if the two have any relation to each other!?), restoration of sanctity by induction of guilt : “it’s not really right, it’s wrong, it only feels right” – in other words, “you’re wrong.  You don’t know the difference between right and wrong.  You tend to temptation.  You have weakness in the flesh.  You are a bad person”.  The self-righteous admonition of guilt-driven religion.  And aren’t so many of us religiously conditioned – subliminally, overtly, involuntarily?  Guilt: the tormenting driver of conscience.

So, where, then is reason?  Real balance?  Yes : No; Day : Night; Birth : Death; Harvesting : Devouring - yes, the Yin and the Yang.

Then the unfamiliar dilemma is posed:  if the question, “how can something so right be so wrong” have a simple understanding, the question remains yet unresolved:  it is deemed wrong, but is it, if at all, in any measure, perhaps, in fact, dare it be: right?  And if it is right, then, why at all wrong?

I think it is hardest to combine the two, as I would say they must be.  Both apply.  We have two eyes – to look both ways; two ears – to hear from both sides; we have two hands – to function independently or together at will.  We have that power to co-ordinate or dislocate.  We can combine or separate.  We can arrive, we can depart.  We can sometimes do all these in one.

That means, then, that the inevitable outcome must be embraced, and that takes courage:  that they are both right and wrong; neither one nor the other, but both, and they must be measured and weighed and balanced and incorporated.  Does that mean to lie?  Perhaps.  Truth and lies.

My actual riddle that has given rise to this quest is that which has come from the passage that I have gone through in the last year, or can the beginning really be so well defined?  It is the corrollory: can something that has been so wrong, actually have been right?  Can there really be salvation in torture?  Can something that was so bad for me really have done me any good?  Can I have gained from something that was as much my decision as anyone else’s and yet turned out to be so bad? – so wrong? – so right?  Can anything that is acuaally known to be wrong, be so right?  Is it wrong of me to have gained from a bad / wrong situation, that was quite my decision as much as anyone’s?

Where is the balance?  Is there always balance or is there complete exclusivity in certain things?  Can some things truly be absolute, unequivocal?  Can some things be sent to certainty?

I think the greatest courage of all lies in embracing both certainty and doubt, to know that both exist and we cannot always be sure which one applies at which time; to pick up and carry on even when we don’t know the road; and, conversely, to have the courage of conviction – of knowing which is right and standing in the courage being confident and certain, and having the courage to know that there is in fact no doubt and the outcome is, in fact, known.  And still not have absolute certainty.

I think here, as in right and wrong – both can exist together : certainty and balance; absolute and proportion.

Add Comment Register



Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>