Murder? Wrong. Charity? Right.
Censorship? Ambivalence. Euthanasia? Confusion. Public display of affection?
Can’t say. Copyright of educational textbooks? Mixed comments. This list goes
on with the majority of these issues evoking a wide range of opinions and
debates.
Right and Wrong, Good and Bad,
Light and Dark - we have known these words since childhood. We have learned
about the triumph of Good over Bad. We blindly accept that Good happens to
those people who do Good. We have been taught to always do the Right thing. If
we do the Wrong thing, then we expect punishment. But is practising
homosexuality wrong? Is it right? Nobody knows for sure. Then, should the practitioner
be punished? Depends. Depends on the scene of the supposed crime. Is it India? If
yes, then they will be punished by law. Is it the United States of America? If so,
then they will not be held culpable of crime.
This leads us to the question -
“What is the concept of Right and Wrong?” These terms, clearly, do not have an
absolute interpretation. The perception of these words, in practice, is related
to time, geography and other human considerations. So, is it so superficial
that it changes identity with a shift in time zones, or is it so deep that it
is beyond understanding?
For instance, euthanasia has
always been a topic of discussion. This has been debated both on the basis of
both morality and legality. Morally, the people who support it do not find
themselves heavily outnumbered. The lack of homogeneity in the legal
interpretations makes one wonder about the universality of justice. India
allows only passive euthanasia, whereas in the Netherlands active euthanasia is
also acceptable. United States of America has made it illegal with the
exception of Physician Assisted Suicide. Is it right of the law to expect a
person to relocate to come under the ambit of Right?
Such interpretations have not
been able to hold their own in the face of time. Sati was an accepted ritual in
most parts of India nearly a century ago. But now neither does it have legal
sanction nor societal acceptance. Individual perceptions often contribute to blurring
the line between Right and Wrong. Copyright on educational textbooks makes for
a fine example. It is rather myopic to expect everyone to view these issues in
black and white; the inherent grey is preferred by some.
The modern era places an impetus
of viewing things through the lens of legality. Legal and illegal have replaced
Right and Wrong. The most probable reason for
this seems that it is easier to outsource our decision making processes as
opposed to being tangled in the war within. Thus, when viewed along the lines
of Right and Wrong, it is the society which has begun to call the shots rather
than the voice of the inner self. Is this shift good? Your views…
-Ayush Poddar
