In his book principles, Ray Dalio presents his philosophy about good and bad. He observed that what people often call good or bad merely reflects their (group’s) preferences and has very little to do with an absolute truth.
Dalio argues that anything is subject to the laws of nature, and that from it, a more universal definition can be conceived. He writes:
[…] ‘good,’ to me, means operating consistently with the natural laws, while ‘bad’ means operating inconsistently with these laws.
And a little further:
In other words, I believe that understanding what is good is obtained by looking at the way the world works and figuring out how to operate in harmony with it to help it (and yourself) evolve.
I’ve always found the subjective nature of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ intriguing. Dalio presents a more objective alternative, but perhaps one with an overly rationalist taste.
Have you ever defined your own ‘good’ and ‘bad’?
