The truth however, is that the mother of all philosophical -particularly in religious context- bitching has always been Super Good vs Ultra Bad.
No matter what letters you put together to describe the so called good/evil, you end up with two basic concepts. Two concepts so fundamentally similar anywhere and anytime, that they define each other. In fact, no matter what system you choose to do a research on (in history, religion or politics for example), you soon enough end up with two opposing factions, one vilified and one sanctified -in reality both at the same time, depending on perspective-.
The same way "Lucifer", (lucem+ferre= the Light Bringer), brings light exactly because he is the manifestation of darkness*, the name itself is a reminder of the fact that absolute good can not exist without absolute evil.
Of course, most people agree that good and evil are mere labels whose (ir)relevance depends on all the factors of the circumstances... What if, however, there was a way to define pure good (≠evil)?
My theory is based on the humanly possible and thus aiming at the least selfish.
If a person and its out-of-the-body reflection both perceived something as good, then the "something" would be good in regards to all the factors concerning the person AND could not be characterised by absolute self-serving purposes.
Of course you haven't understood anything, so let me explain the shit I'm talking about. If there's one thing everyone, consciously or subconsciously, IS wishing for, that's a lil' bit o' looove.
It IS the one emotion that when truly experienced is the most altruistic shit ever after all. So, the person who truly loves you (excuse the cheesiness of everything, but in my defense I haven't mentioned puppies yet), will be the one most aware of things that concern you in a very accurate, yet different from yours, point of view. In other words,
if two parts of a whole identify something as ~good~ (that very thing being the one that makes them a whole), then perhaps that actually IS motherfuckin' gooood.
Perhaps Love is the manifestation of pure good.
Since you were adopted, you will now debate on whether such a "good" can actually be perceived as "good" by other systems as well. Well, I'm gonna use corky card#1 and emphasize on the fact that I'm talking about real, benevolent, magnanimous l.o.v.e. The kind that makes you stronger in the most subtle of ways, because it makes the person stronger, as opposed to the belief of the others about the person.
Maybe good and evil have always been perceived as a self-devouring ouroboro,
because people do not take into account that in order for god-like pure good and (anti)god-like pure evil to exist, one must be either god-like..ly selfless and... well, pure at heart or (anti)god-like..ly empty, emotionwise.
It takes a little bit of magic, it takes a little bit of luck: it takes a little bit of love.
After all, if pure love isn't the manifestation of pure good (and the absence of it the cause of pure evil), then what the hell is?
*euphemism is another guess of mine, especially during the ages when Christians where nothing more that a god-fearing, ill-informed, superstitious bunch of villagers basically (kinda like not saying Voldemort out loud).
The Force Doesn't Give A Shit, It Takes Its Name By Being Forced To Be With You by The Schismarch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Greece License.