Exclusive: Garon's "Vision", and "Ethics"
Garon's vision was vast, a natural pride, and he didn't care at all about the offenses and injuries. People with this trait do not teach themselves to be patient, they do not carefully cultivate virtue. He even openly despised the virtues of the common people, but did not do obscene and despicable things. Because his gaze is cast to the distant sky, he is completely unguarded by the limitations of the present.
As a teenager, there was only one Gemini Golden Saint, and Sagar got this status.
In other people' ways, the instinctive reaction is to be jealous of Sagar, and there may even be hope that Saga will suffer and replace it with the idea. Those who are replaced by servile people will accept this injustice tamely. And people with a broad heart may take the overall situation of the Sacred Domain as the most important thing, persuade themselves not to consider personal gains and losses, and slowly smooth out the wounds in their hearts.
Only Garon is a stranger with a broad vision but aversion to "virtue". His thinking was extremely clear: the crux of the matter was the rules of the Sacred Realm itself, not the individual Saga, who also lived under the rules.
Therefore, he did not envy Sagar, but felt that Sagar and himself were companions on the same front. Garon felt that in this case, jealousy was ridiculous, but it just fell into the trap of those in power, so that between the "gladiators" and "gladiators", there was a fight between you and me. He even had some sympathy for Sagar, because the Sacred Domain, while giving Him honor and qualifications, also took away Sagar's freedom as an individual. In Garon's vision, relying on independent will and freedom, it is completely possible to seize higher honors and grant himself the highest qualifications, not to mention the qualifications under the "rules". If you can dig and own the diamond mine yourself, why fight for a diamond ring?
In Garon's eyes, the opportunities he can seize are unlimited. Such a vision gives his heart a lot more possibilities and flexibility than ordinary people.
Garon, 15, once said an unforgettable sentence: "What's wrong with using your own strength to fight for what you want?" Don't rush to label him "careerist", "self-centered" or the like. Let's analyze whether he is right from a "moral" point of view.
The essence of "morality" is to discuss only two things.
"Who" should pay "how much" effort, "who" "deserves" how much benefit. The others are culture, public opinion, law, etc., deliberately mixed in with the blindfold. Man's innate sense of "morality" is the instinctive feeling that the balance of effort and interest must be maintained in a certain balance, or at least "sincerity to maintain a balance."
In the East, the law of balancing "effort" and "interest" is "do not do to others what you do not want." This is to ask people to try to control themselves and not to do certain actions that harm others in order to protect the interests of others. Even if these harmful actions can bring benefits to themselves.
In the West, the Golden Rule of Christianity is to "love your neighbor as you love yourself." But love is a subjective feeling, how to measure whether this law is observed? It is through action -- with their own efforts, so that the neighbors get a certain benefit. This kind of effort can be as small as greeting the neighbor every day, making him feel happy, and can be generous enough to save the neighbor's life.
Of course, the Golden Rule theoretically applies to everyone, so if a neighbor is a "moral" person, he will reciprocate, maintaining a balance of efforts and interests on both sides.
The above is a balance of effort and interest, and it is also the "morality" in human nature.
However, there are many "morals" in which efforts and interests are not equal, both historically and in reality. At this time, it is advisable to study, formulate, propagate, and defend these "moral values", where are the interests of them and their companions?
Nine times out of ten it is these "morals" that allow them to receive more than their fair share of the benefits and make others pay unpaid efforts. Therefore, this so-called "moral outlook" is only a "blindfold" for those who have vested interests to obtain excess benefits, and to "justifiably" enjoy the fruits of other people's efforts. #I'm going to make micro-headlines##圣斗士 #
