Would be “Good Guys” the opposite? The usual suspects spring up in my mind, criminals like killers or murderers, people who violate the law, transgress boundaries. What law, which boundaries? Maybe humans have something in themselves what enables them to differentiate between right and wrong – equals this the distinction between “good” and “bad”? What is called “natural law” (Ger., Eng.) plays a major role in the enlightenment and the humanist idea of man, I really hope there is some truth in it.
Good is the one who does good, bad is the one who does bad. Measured by what? The deed itself, the outcome or result – be it intented or a side-effect, a “collateral damage” only -, the tools and instruments used? The intention? Besides the fact that history is full of baby-kissing pet-patting monsters who always had the best intentions, looking at the intention of humans’ deeds does not solve the basical problem, the difference between good and bad.
What I listed in this paragraph are points to be verifyed for example in a criminal process. Or an historical research. The job of a judge is not to deceide whether something or someone is good or bad, but whether rules are broken and regulations of law are followed – or not. The historian has not to deceide whether someone was good or bad, the task is to find out what choices the acting human had, to understand why and how a historical figure acted. Sometimes first of all must be clarified who de facto did what.
Moral and ethics change over time, what four generations ago may have been considered a crime or the sign of total personal failure and corruption, can today be understood very different. That’s why history never ends, it is permanently rewritten and recreated.
No answers. No simple explanations.
I wanted to show a scene from Rashomon, but one needs to see the entire film, there is not “the” scene, and the trailer was terrible.
So its Blast of Silence.