Goodness and Evil: Yin and Yang. Can concepts such as goodness and evil be considered absolute and universal? Who can be regarded as an infallible source for the expression of goodness and evil? According to the Canterbury scholar from the Middle Ages: "Concepts like goodness, evil, and truth exist independently of these, which humans evaluate as true concepts and regardless of the actions characterized as just actions." Throughout the history of philosophy, many thinkers and schools have placed relative truth in the place of absolute truth. But do concepts like goodness and evil actually exist in the world? Or is their existence merely contingent upon human existence, making them quite different and relative concepts? If we delve deeply, we might come to the conclusion that there is no such concept as goodness and evil-- there is only the concept of pleasant and unpleasant. What caused pleasure in a person was called goodness, and what caused harm was called evil. In this particular case, it also depends subjectively on human feelings and perceptions. For example, to many people, torture is an act to be condemned, whether deliberate or not, but there is a category of people for whom torture (masochism) is associated with pleasure.
Sophists' Views on Truth
According to the sophists: There is no absolute truth for everyone, just as there is no single and unchanging world. The world and truth are changeable, and the measure of both is the subjectivity of individuals; thus, the measure of everything is individual. Objective truth is rejected and replaced by relative or contingent truth. Truth is what is beneficial for the person, meaning that a lie can also be considered truth; there is no measure for the falseness of truth. A politician tries to present even erroneous claims as truth in order to gain benefit. Sophistry was used as a derogatory term from the 4th century.
Pragmatic View of Truth
According to pragmatism, truth is what works for us, what leads us to our goals, what is beneficial and advantageous. A true idea that is beneficial does not necessarily mean that every beneficial idea is true in itself. Accordingly, what might be useful for one individual may be useless or even harmful for another, making the measure of truth purely subjective. If we rely on pragmatism, as many useful ideas exist, so many truths exist. Thus, objective truth is impossible. Pragmatism, from its perspective, equates science and religion. If it turns out that religious ideas have value for life, then they are true. For example, the commandment of God gives us information about eternal life, so this idea is useful. In summary, pragmatism approaches the surrounding world with a utilitarian perspective.
Shattered Idols
Humanity has long been inclined to the cultivation of idols, and this tendency continues indirectly today. In ancient Greece, the Olympian gods were revered. Greece today still evokes associations with the grand and powerful Olympian gods for many, but this attitude towards Greek culture is incorrect. To understand the nature of Greek Olympian gods correctly, we need to refer to Nietzsche's quote. According to Nietzsche, to truly understand Greek mythology, we should view it not in Apollonian terms (their grandeur and power), but in Dionysian terms (their depravity and immorality).
Today, comics and films about superheroes are particularly attractive to young people. These are portrayed as ethical, aesthetic, punctual, and powerful. They are directed towards the realization of justice and the establishment of world peace. Most importantly, they appear as relentless enemies of evil. Personally, I have always found such stories or films absurd due to their utopian plots. A superhero? With colossal physical abilities, high intelligence, and a pure soul? These three characteristics should not necessarily harmonize. Where is the will, the passion, the will to power, and the egotistical nature of humans? Are they saints and not superhumans? I have always been disappointed when I could not see anything Dionysian in them and always perceived such films, series, as bedtime stories for children. Until the series The Boys appeared on screens, which presented my unrelenting desire to see superheroes depicted with their real brutal appearance. With their depravity, unquenchable desire for dominance, bloody plots-- essentially, I was waiting for a Dionysian appearance of superheroes on screen. But most people are so captivated by the myth that every story should have a happy ending. They are satisfied with the portrayal of main characters in superhero stories as noble and then identifying them with their favorite heroes in real life. While this might seem good at first glance, as they are embracing Apollonian ideals with this attempt, in reality, they are still inclined towards Dionysian tendencies. This attempt to emulate favorite superheroes fosters egocentrism and the main character syndrome in the real world
