conversations on ethics


TOUCHING TRINITIES

What follows is about touching trinities. It seemed to be a curioso but it appeared to be an important element in answering the question: what is good and what is wrong.


fig. 1

Simple things first. Why am I speaking of touching trinities? According to pope Benedictus there’s only one Trinity. Well, I can make more. Isn’t that cute? Isn’t that quaint? The delight of this simple truth ... indeed, it is very touching.
If they are touching - is trinities plural or do we have to say: is trinities touching? - or if they can be touching - even a trinity can’t do anything it likes - remains to be answered. But look at the picture: the simpleness of how to design a trinity, not being bothered by all the literature in the world, not a single footnote to whoever has given the subject a second thought ... yes, it is touching.

What does a trinity consist of? Father Son and Ghost, holy or not? No, too easy.
Let’s start with removing the son. The son is just more of the same, no more than an appearance of the father. The father needed the shape for being recognizable coming down to earth, to be acceptable. And it didn’t even work. In the end they rejected him.
The son is also the second thought of the father. The last has judged the inhabitants of the world as wicked people, not worth to receive in heaven. Now he feels lonely and has invented a son to solve the problem.

It was at this point that I thought trinity could be helpful with understanding right and wrong, good and evil.

The devil seems more appropriate. Yeah, here it is that we can apply the touching trinities.
So the G stands for good or God - yes God is definitely good.
Then we need the D for devil. Doing evil, doing wrong. Can we decide that? Doing is wrongdoing, evildoing? Yes of course. When everything is in rest, there is peace. While by doing something you can do harm. What irony! The creator, the first mover who started everything, created evil. So D stands for devil and for doer.

But then the third dimension is superfluous. If we have good and evil, there is no need for a trinity.
Although ...
Yes, there is always debate about: is something evil or good. It’s like a twin. And who can tell either of the two? The mother. Like Maria.
Didn’t we invent the mother of all this and all that?
So we have the M. Mother of good and evil. Maria.

Therefore the trinity stands from now for mother - good - doer!
Therefore it’s logical that you have more trinities. Trinity has a plural. Everyone his own MGD-trinity. I can provide anyone who wants so with his own trinity!



fig. 2

and



fig. 3

The design of touching trinities suggests that you need space. Lines with circles around these lines.
I thought, the idea of space must be essential for the solution of the problem. As long as good and evil are abstract terms, you will have people like Kamm or Singer.
How could I justify space for MGD? If we suppose that G en D are in flat space, 2-dimensional, then it is M that makes it 3-dimensional, that allows for circles wrapped around lines. G and D come out depths - out of the depths comes darkness, out of the depths I cry for justice - and these depths are made available by M, the mother of everything.
Yes, that’s it! The depths of the mother deliver the deeds of potential evil and possible good.

In the design you can see that each part of the trinity can have different shapes. Only in fig. 3 I did dare to mark a singular line with one of the identifying letters.
But I can’t tell you. I can’t even tell you if good/doer is the line, or the space enclosed by the circles around the line.
How it is that from the depths of Maria the depths of good and doer have been filled, or are filled? No way the Holy Ghost was fiddling around. I didn’t even have to remove him from the trinity. He appeared to be a non-entity.
So don’t ask me. I do not want to come in the position that you refuse my answer, saying: not a single footnote to Leonardo!

Can trinities touch each other?
If there are an infinite number of trinities possible, then they can touch. And it is natural that they touch. Because, how should we tell good from wrong if they never meet? They have to interfere with each other. And by interfering with each other, I think, it is also possible to turn evil into good. I believe in that.
If good can turn into evil: even if it is an excuse, people say so.
Maria we can’t ask. She is not communicapable.

I guess we now have a basis to handle, to understand the interviews of Voorhoeve in a better way! At least it gives you a better understanding of my way of looking at things of wright and rong.