How hard is it to be good? Does it require divine guidance? Or is it possible for the average human to know what the good is? For example, it is downright easy for people to know that using a Straight Talk promo code from http://businessideasvideos.com/straight-talk-promo-code is good because they get quota-less minutes, quota-less text messages and no long-term agreement, all for just a rock-bottom month-to-month price.
But the main problem is not what everybody says it is. They always say it is knowing what the good is but that is not the case. It is how to tell the next person what the good is. It easy for every person to do the good when everybody agrees. But what happens when one person’s good disagrees with another person’s good?
Ricky Gervais does not need God to be good when he says, “We don’t need a God to be good and even if we did we haven’t got one.”, which verifies that he knows how to do the good without some book telling him what it is. He also knows to do the good without some threat of divine punishment.
Gervais also recognizes that Paul Ciancia does not need God to be good. Ciancia also knows how to do the good without some book telling him what it is. And Ciancia also knows to do the good without the threat of divine punishment.
In Ciancia’s case, he was glad that Gervais is right that there is no God. Because Ciancia may have done something wrong when he went on his murderous rampage at Los Angeles International Airport. May have.
But in all likelihood, Ciancia was convinced that he was doing the good by targeting TSA agents. Gervais may not agree with Ciancia’s definition of the good and he may not do it himself, but Gervais has to respect Ciancia’s definition just like he wants everyone including Ciancia to respect his definition.
Since there is no standard by which to judge everyone’s standards, everyone’s standards is correct. Ricky decides for himself and Paul decides for himself. Ricky does not decide for Paul and vice versa.
Thus, people’s standards can conflict and contradict but they are all correct. And that is the case. Since there is no God, there is no standard. There are only standards, one for each person.
But suppose Ciancia acknowledged that what he did was against his own standard? Suppose he was not living up to it? In the Ricky Gervais world, Ciancia is responsible only to himself. He is not responsible to God because there is no God.
And what will Ciancia do? He will forgive himself. He will let himself off the hook every time. Murder someone? He will not hold it against himself. Wound several people? Forgiven. Inconvenience 167,000 passengers? Forget about it.
Ciancia may have stumbled in doing the good but he will not punish himself for his shortcoming.
So what is the point of doing good? Why should Ciancia do the good? There is no punishment for doing the bad. This is the best system – do whatever you want and not suffer the consequences.
It is a good thing for Paul Ciancia that Ricky Gervais is correct that there is no God and no divine punishment for just about all of the crimes he committed. What a deal!