Temple of Stone. Pen, fun, and www.biquge.info

In any era, people's moral level should match the times, and too high moral level and too low moral level are themselves a manifestation of violating the humanitarian order......

If the civilization of an era develops to a high enough level, then the level of morality must also reach a level that matches the civilization, otherwise the humanitarian order will naturally collapse......

Whether it is too high a moral standard or too low a moral standard, in fact, in a sense, it is an inhumane phenomenon!

The so-called humanity, in essence, means that everyone does things that are in line with their identity, and everyone has a moral level that matches their identity......

Returning to the original topic, such as the so-called act of Zigong ransom, in fact, it is essentially an inhumane act......

Although this kind of behavior is itself a well-intentioned act, it will inevitably raise the moral standards of society, and the very fact of raising the moral standards of society is itself an act that is inhumane and inhumane......

Many people always feel that the more good deeds and good intentions are, the more the merrier, but in fact, kindness is also based on meeting social standards, and if it exceeds the scale of social standards, goodness will naturally become evil......

Just like the story of Zigong's ransom, Zigong is certainly a kind, noble and wise sage, but on the issue of ransom slaves, the virtuous ability he shows has become a factor hindering the development of humanity!

The reason is simple, because he has raised the standard of morality too high!

The story of Zigong's redemption of slaves is actually very simple......

In the Spring and Autumn Period, there were many people in Lu who were slaves in a foreign land, and the monarch of Lu felt very worried after discovering this matter, so he ordered that all Lu people, seeing the Lu compatriots who were enslaved in a foreign country, should redeem themselves for these slave Lu people, so that the Lu people could be free, of course, in order not to increase the burden of the Lu people, the money needed to redeem the slaves was borne by the king of the Lu country......

Since the announcement of this policy, many people have implemented it, and after returning to the country of Lu, they have been compensated by the king of Lu......

After receiving compensation from King Lu, the people praised King Lu's mercy, and these Lu people who redeemed slaves were also appreciated, believing that their actions were noble and full of a sense of justice......

As a result, the people of Lu have worked hard to redeem their compatriots in various countries, and this policy has also been unanimously praised......

King Lu is considered to be a benevolent king, and those Lu people who redeem slaves are also considered to be righteous men and gentlemen with noble character and righteous hearts......

However, at this time, Zigong did one thing......

His family is very rich, so he doesn't care about money, so after redeeming a few slaves of Lu, he did not accept the compensation of King Lu, that is, he chose to redeem those slaves of Lu at his own expense......

There is no doubt that his actions were of course done in good faith, and he did so out of good intentions......

However, after Confucius heard about this, he severely criticized Zigong's actions......

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――― ―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――

Why?

In fact, it is very simple, because Zigong's behavior is actually a kind of destruction of the policy!

After the news spread that Zigong did not receive a bounty for redeeming slaves, on the one hand, people naturally praised Zigong's noble personality, and on the other hand, for those Lu people who redeemed slaves but still went to receive compensation, they did not respect them as much as before, and even some people felt that they were not good enough and their behavior was not noble enough, they should be like Zigong, even if they paid for themselves, they should redeem the slaves, and after redeeming the slaves, they should not ask for compensation from King Lu......

The so-called is not afraid of not knowing the goods, but afraid of comparing goods......

In this world, many times, people need to compare to reflect the "good and bad".

Zigong's behavior is naturally noble, so compared with Zigong's behavior, those Lu people who ransomed their slaves but demanded compensation seem to be less noble......

Noble and not noble, many times are just relative concepts!

With the contrast, the noble and the unnoble seem to become distinct......

And the actual result of this situation is that the vast majority of people are unwilling to redeem their own compatriots!

It's simple......

Things that benefit others and self are always willing to do things that no matter who they are, and when they harm others and benefit themselves, there are always so many people who are willing to do them, but not so many people are willing to do things that harm themselves and benefit others!

Before Zigong did this, King Lu's policy was undoubtedly a matter of benefiting others and himself, and redeeming his compatriots was naturally a good thing for others, and he didn't need to spend money on his own money to get fame, and it was naturally a self-interested thing, for King Lu, despite the money he paid, he could gain prestige, and it was also a matter of benefiting himself......

As a result, this matter can naturally spread in a short period of time and form a sufficient scale effect......

However, Zigong's behavior raised the so-called moral standards, so that what was beneficial to others and self for the vast majority of people became a thing that harmed others and benefited themselves......

Either you lose money and get praised, or you save people and you are despised at best, in this case, people are naturally reluctant to do the original good deeds......

Because, if you have to make yourself suffer losses after doing good deeds, then for the vast majority of people, such good deeds can be said to be okay not to do......

And for King Lu, it was originally a good thing that could allow him to gain a lot of prestige, but if he was destroyed by Zigong, his prestige would also be divided a lot, and it could also be said that it became a little thankless......

In a sense, this kind of Zigong's behavior itself is certainly good, but the result of this kind of goodwill behavior is very, very bad......

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――― ―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――

In the same way, many things in this world may have been originally well-intentioned, but the results are not necessarily well-intentioned......

It's like a moral level that most people can't reach, and because of this, blindly advocating this kind of moral level is actually an anti-humane and anti-human behavior......

The moral level is always raised with the abundance of material life, and it is a wrong idea to advocate a moral level that exceeds the material standard of living before the material life is not enriched to a certain height......

Compared with the collection of gold, the person who picks up the wallet is entitled to claim a part of the fee from the owner as the reward for picking up the wallet, such a system, in fact, in a sense, is more in line with reality, and this kind of behavior is also more self-interested behavior......

After all, the act of losing a wallet is itself a mistake of the owner, and no one will not have to pay for their mistakes......

In the same way, the process of finding the owner of the wallet also costs his time and energy, and it is actually an understandable thing to obtain a certain amount of compensation......

Not needing compensation is one thing, but whether it is ethical to ask for compensation is another concept......

If it is considered immoral to ask for reasonable compensation after picking up something, then the vast majority of people will not choose to return it to its owner after picking it up......

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――― ―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――

The law of humanity itself is just that......

The same truth, like the truth that smoking is bad for health, in fact, everyone knows it......

In real life, there are always some people who will become volunteers to promote the ban on smoking, and are committed to helping people realize the dangers of smoking and make people avoid smoking as much as possible......

Such an act is naturally well-intentioned......

However, if this kind of goodwill is taken to the extreme, then goodwill will also turn into malice!

It's like there are a very small number of volunteers who can't stand other people's smoking, and when they see others smoking, they can't help but grab the cigarette from their mouth and put it on the ground to extinguish it, in the name of helping the other person......

For the vast majority of people, I am afraid that this kind of help is not appreciated......

After all, smoking is harmful to health, but since cigarettes are still being sold legally, then cigarettes are the private property of every smoker, and every citizen has the right to decide whether to smoke or not......

In fact, in reality, such bandit logic is not rare......

Just like some vegetarians in reality, or because of their belief in Buddhism, or for various reasons, they choose vegetarianism, and the vast majority of vegetarians are pure-hearted people, they are not willing to kill, they think that all living beings are equal, and killing other animals as food is an unacceptable concept for them......

In fact, there are not a few people in real life, and the vast majority of people may be meat-eaters, but they will not reject these vegetarians, but will feel that their moral and moral cultivation is higher than that of ordinary people, and they are more worthy of association......

In the final analysis, the moral level of this part of the people is actually higher than the average, but as long as this above-average part does not go beyond the scope of humanity, then it is worthy of admiration......

But what if it's an avid vegan who goes beyond that scale?

Then the situation is different!

Many fanatical vegetarians, they not only want to be vegetarian themselves, but also always try to persuade others to choose vegetarian food, meet those who eat meat, always like to look at them with a kind of pity, feel that they are very pitiful, feel that they don't know how to live at all, so they always have an attitude of wanting to save them to talk to them, always use a condescending tone, to persuade those people to be vegetarian......

Some of them are very extreme and will always say that the earth is now on the verge of destruction, and only those vegetarians who are good will be able to live, and if they don't eat vegetarians, they will only go to hell in the end, and there will be only one way to die......

Such a person is actually a typical ****** anti-humanity and anti-humanity......

(To be continued.) )