3 Answers

  1. Why is this question published with the tags “psychology” and “psychiatry”? There is no clear answer to this question, because it is ethical. There are a large number of ethical models that, in the roughest form, are divided into absolute (assuming that there are objectively good and bad actions, regardless of the context) and relativistic ethics (assuming that the moral assessment of an action depends on factors external to the actions). Relativistic ethics are divided into constructivist (assuming that this external factor is a public assessment – what others consider good is good) and consequentialist (assuming that external factors that determine the moral value of an action are the consequences of that action). Within these types of ethics, there are more subtle gradations, and different authors offer their own versions, so you can decide for yourself what is good and what is bad by Googling these ethical models, reviewing them, and deciding for yourself which one you want to follow (in case of difficulties, there is a model of moral relativism, according to which there is no need to follow any one ethics). We have no proof of the existence of “correct” ethics.

  2. As you know, everything is completely subjective here

    It is only necessary to remember that these are two sides, but the coin is one

    The universe is always in balance, no matter how you look at it

  3. What is good is what creates something new and interesting for others. And the bad thing is that because of which something collapses, is destroyed. I will not discuss the subjectivity of human perception. There is a pattern: what takes away from others the freedom to live, think, and create is bad. And the fact that it increases the freedom to do whatever you like is good.

Leave a Reply