relative the word "bad"), permit me to offer this prosaic example of what
such words really mean, assuming they mean anything at all. Suppose you
decide to make a lemon pie. To do so, you buy lemons and sugar. If the
lemons turn out to be saccharin sweet, you would probably label them as
"bad" because they failed to answer your interest in having tartness in
your pie. If the sugar turned out to be tart, you would probably label it as "bad" because it failed to answer your interest in having sweetness in your pie.
So what does this suggest about these appellations? It
simply tells us that the adjectives "good" and "bad" have no core meaning
other than
being an indication that X does or does not answer to certain
wishes or interests a person has. It's really that simple.
Beware of
the "fog of war," and try to avoid contributing to that fog with this kind
of metaphysical nonsense or to allow semantic folderol to confuse your own
thinking about what your government is doing or not doing. Those who use
empty terms such as "evil" should be called upon to give us real, tangible
reasons for their acts. We must challenge the penchant of the White House
illusionists to make meaningless noises with their mealy
mouths.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
