Right and wrong

(images sourced from the internet)

“There is no right or wrong; only our thoughts and perceptions make it so.” 

― Debasish Mridha, American Physician

“Just say something nice and right, and then see how so many people try to prove the same thing full of lies and wrong.” 

― Anuj Somany

“Rights can be considered wrongs, depending on who is judging.” 

― Suzy Kassem, Rise Up and Salute the Sun: The Writings of Suzy Kassem

“It's not about making the right choice. It's about making a choice and making it right.” 

― J.R. Rim, Better to be able to love than to be loveable

"Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.” 

― Augustine of Hippo

“So far, about morals, I know only that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after.” 

― Ernest Hemingway, in 'Death in the Afternoon'

“More evil gets done in the name of righteousness than any other way.” 

― Glen Cook, Dreams of Steel

“The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell.” 

― Confucius

"The hell with it! There ain't no sin and there ain't no virtue. There's just stuff people do. It's all part of the same thing. And some of the things folks do is nice, and some ain't nice, but that's as far as any man got a right to say.” 

― John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath

What is right and what is wrong? Who sits in judgment of what is right and wrong? Is there really a right and a wrong? Can what is right for someone be wrong for another and vice versa?

Every religion, spiritual person or a head of a sect talks about a right and a wrong. The things that you should do to be on the side of the right and the things you should avoid so that you are not on the side of the wrong, and so on and so forth. One does not need to believe in God to decide what is right and wrong. But, firstly what is a right and what is a wrong?

Today, the society - each section has its own “society” for moralising - decides what is right and wrong. There are unwritten rules which manifest in the society's actions and decisions on what is right and wrong. Some of them get codified as law. It is however, left to the individual to ignore the pressures of the society and go about his own life without waiting for the society to sit in judgement over his acts, as long as they are lawful and are not disruptive or hurtful to others in normal course - else, the law is there to take care of his acts. Yes, perhaps some right or wrong is in the interests of a stable society; in the absence of right or wrong, each person could do what they want.

In this post, let us only concern ourselves with the uncodified laws, which transpire as right and wrong.

What constitutes as 'sin'? A 'wrong' is generally regarded as a 'sin'. All religions do have their own concept of sins - the seven sins / 'wrongs' in Christianity, the ten commandments, five poisons in Buddhism, the tenets of Dos and don'ts in Islam etc.  (I find that Hinduism is less 'preachy' that way - there are tenets, but there is no absolute right or wrong and if so, it is relative. The Mahabharata is the best example of what is right and wrong depends on you.)

Common sins (wrongs) are pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth. A lot of these are seen as qualities that may impede spiritual growth. however it is arguable if they apply as vigorously in material life as well. 'Thou shalt not....' is the commonly used prefix whilst referring to these wrongs. But are the wrongs really 'wrong'? And by not participating in the wrongs, are we actually doing what is right?

Sloth, for example, is laziness. Gluttony is eating too much. Wrath, a manifestation of anger.

Sloth? But isn't being lazy something we like sometimes. Monday mornings, for example. Do we ever feel like going to school or office? Don't we feel like lazing in bed? Lazing even helps you recharge and refresh. Even calm you down and refresh your thought process.

Anger? Anger, when channelised in the right direction, can, in fact, produce magic, change oneself.  Sometimes, it helps one recover from pressing situations. It indicates the intensity of resistance to a thought or a deed.

Greed? As the character Gordon Gekko says in the Hollywood movie 'Wall Street', "Greed is good." It is indeed good because it pushes you, motivates you to raise the bar, to achieve more, which you would not if you were content with something less. It motivates you to go further and explore.

I believe that these 'wrongs' are not 'wrongs' as such, but it could also depend on the strength of the dose of the wrong. You can't be lazing all the seven days, for example. But one cannot say it as wrong. It is bad, but not wrong. It is for the person lazing around to decide.

For a moment, let us take away religion and God from the picture. Can things only be right and wrong? Only black and white? Why can't they fall into some other category? As they say, 'shades of grey'? Take away religion and morals and we would be left with action and consequences.  

I don't drink. But is it right on my part to say that drinking is wrong?  Wouldn't that be very convenient? Smoking is bad, yes. But is smoking wrong? When I say smoking is 'bad', I am express an opinion. When I say smoking is 'wrong', I am pass a judgement. Get the drift? Hence a 'right' or 'wrong' is associated with what I do, I can do and what I want or need. My goals; my views; my actions.

There are no absolute standards by which we can decide what is a wrong. Only subjective, egoistic notions. In fact, the debate between right and wrong would not arise if there was a settled notion or something objective on what constitutes right and what constitutes wrong. If there is still a debate, and there is indeed, it means that there is no right and wrong. I believe a wrong can be only on a matter of fact and not a matter of perception. For example, if someone says that the earth is not round, then it is wrong. This is because that it is proved that the earth is round; we have read it, seen it with our eyes. So for saying something contradictory to that, you need to prove and you can't. Is one plus one two?  It is, and it is a fact. If you get a different answer, then perhaps you are wrong. If you don't understand a fact then you have not understood all the laws.

But a matter of perception? Who decides what is wrong and right? You cannot tell someone that his opinion is wrong just because you don't share it, isn't it?

A man does not take care of his family, idling and boozing. The society has a right of opinion on it but not impose itself. Adultery, for example. The Indian Penal code gives the right of complaint to the lady wronged by the adultery committed by the husband and not to the society. In fact, this right of complaint is not even given to the husband by the IPC! The only thing that might perhaps be wrong in such a case is when you take away from another, what rightfully belongs to him - it could be his life, possessions, persons near and dear, even peace. Nothing else can constitute a wrong. That is again, perceptive. No one can sit in judgement and point fingers at you otherwise. Social iconoclasts have been the people who have lived their lives to the hilt and done it right, according to them, which is why many of such ilk have gone on to become achievers in their own right.

The world is a perfect place or an imperfect place depending on  how you see it. We are all different and hence it is not possible to opine similarly on right or wrong. Don't expect someone to share your opinion for you to feel better. People criticize, because that's the most adopted hobby. It is the favorite pastime. Opinions of right or wrong are personal. Just ignore. So, go ahead and just do your own thing. Just do it, keeping in mind that while we may chose to lead our life the way we want, we are responsible for our actions and their consequences. 

To conclude, a story from the internet:

A wise Zen frog was explaining to the younger frogs the balance of nature: "Do you see how that fly eats a gnat? And now (with a bite) I eat the fly. It is all part of the great scheme of things." "Isn't it wrong to kill in order to live?" asked one of the frogs that was listening to the sermon."It depends on....." the wise frog was just answering the question, when a snake came out of nowhere and swallowed before it could finish his sentence. "Depends on what?" shouted the frogs. "Depends on whether you're looking at things from the inside or outside," came the muffled response from inside the snake.