Code

Socrates believed in an unchanging universal good that people found through truth. His belief in absolutes led to stubbornness and he essentially allowed himself to be executed rather than go against his beliefs. Socrates is lionized as a man of conviction and much of western society would probably claim to agree with his beliefs.

Paradoxically, while claiming to be a master of logic, Socrates was more a master of rhetoric (and, yes, when we say Socrates, we really mean Plato). In a very sophist manner, Socrates was able to make people contradict themselves in order to destroy their arguments and assumptions. Of course, the dialogs in which Plato is part of are comically staged. Socrates’ opponents constantly say things like “certainly,” “precisely,” and “true.” Ironically, it is their belief in absolutes that allows Socrates to make connections that eventually contradicts.

In the real world, morality, goodness and truth are messy. They exist in the relative and universal simultaneously. They exist in the theoretic and the practical. For this reason, we mistrust the legal system for its casuistry, yet a simultaneously, we dislike inequity.

Morality is affected by all sorts of complicating factors. For instance, opportunity is a huge part of morality. A man may believe he would never cheat on their wife, but if Angelina Jolie actually came over and attempted to seduce him, he may act differently. Luck affects things. People drive home drunk all the time, but if a child jumps out in the street and is hit, the driver suffers a very different consequence.

In the end, it is impossible to live by a set universal code. Instead, our codes are personal, dynamic, relative and ever-changing. They are living and changing things that allow us to deal with a living and changing universe. Being a good person is difficult because not just because people may disagree with you or because you may harm yourself. Being a good person is difficult because it is mentally exhausting figuring out the right thing to do.