ISSUE139 BY SadPy 求拍

SadPyUID: 2768525

TOPIC: ISSUE139 - "Every new generation needs to redefine 'right' and 'wrong' in its own terms and according to the conditions of its own time."

I strongly agree with the statement that it is important for every new generation to redefine what is right and what is wrong to the conditions of its own time, for knowledge changes quickly with the replacement of generations. Moreover, since knowledge goes to be more precise and proper, the definition of “right” and “wrong” according to our knowledge tends to be more accurate and harmonious with the society.

Consider the development of science. Aristotle’s influence lasts thousands years, but no one would defend his theory of gravity anymore—which states that objects fall at a speed relative to their mass—since Galileo dropped two objects of different mass from the top of the Leaning Tower of Pisa, which disproved Aristotle’s theory. Another example is the declination of theology and the rise of science. In the past, people cannot explain various nature phenomena, so they created Spirit and theology. When science explicated those unknown, Spirit and theology are redefined. In sum, new generations are likely to obtain more knowledge than their ancestors, so what the older generations believe may no longer be upheld by the descendants. That’s why every new generation has to redefine the “right” and “wrong”.

The “right” and “wrong” about behaviors are also to be rewrote by new generations, mostly because the new regulations and ethics are more accordant to the new circumstance of society and economy. For example, why female were so limited in fields of career and marriage in the ancient time but today they gradually have the equal right as male? The ancestors have their reason to do so. However, the improvement of productivity, changes of work forms and the demand of societies enable women and make it necessary for them to take part in work. The enhancement of women’s education and knowledge also evokes their awareness of participating social affairs. These “old-wrong” and “today-right” may not to do with the objective truth, but to do with the social order and efficiency. New generations have to redefine it to adapt to their era of new characteristics.

In the future, we will encounter more situations that our evaluations need to be reconsidered. The discoveries in the fields of genomics and biology give us a dilemma about human cloning; on the one hand our current ethics is against the idea of cloning people; on the other hand, this impediment may prevent from the development of genomics and biology technology, which is potentially beneficial to cure many genome-related diseases. In my view, no matter if people will eventually open a door for human cloning or not, such demands to redefinition are not rare for every new generation.

Certainly, there are something deserve to be held as right and wrong forever such as true, love, beauty and their opposites.

All in all, old paraphrase of “right” and “wrong” has its value to the old generation. When the value is no longer fit the time, it is the descendants' responsibility to amend it on its own terms.