The Informant! was really good. Surprising and funny right up to the end. It tells the true story of a high executive Whistle-Blower in the 1990s through a comedic lens. I don't want to spoil the movie for anyone. So I won't. But everything following was extracted from thinking about the movie.

Do you think Caesar could pinpoint the day when he lost sight of Rome? Or did he die still believing he acted out of its best interests? Likewise, can we consider the conspirators heroes? They didn't save the republic. Had they gone about things differently maybe they would have and maybe our world today would look dramatically different. No, they weren't heroes. But they did make history, they made it explode in a shockwave of effect and fireworks. Would Caesar be so prominent today if he hadn't been killed?

Where is this line that blurs good and bad? Is it inevitable that with enough power the good will become that which they abhorred the most?

I think the issue must be with my terminology. Who ever said Caesar was good or bad? As we continuously propagate and move further away from his time we move further away from that distinction. And yet it's the easiest distinction to make. We want to make it that simple. He did good for the human species or he did bad. No matter what he did something. Good or Bad are merely annotations added by others. And I doubt they'll stop.

There is trouble though. Everyone is good. Of the entire population only a small sociopath minority actually act with the intent of doing bad. Most criminals in the jails don't see themselves as bad. It's society who does. Those we term terrorists are acting out of the utmost good in their heads. It's us across an ocean and a mass of land who call them bad. It seems like the idea of good and bad must then be a propaganda tool. It's something we put in our heads to justify our actions. But there is no evidence for actual goodness because it doesn't exist. Morality is not inherent.

By my standards I am a good person. But I created those standards based on me. Of course I am good when I apply that lens. Goodness is something inherited from a long tradition of humans who see themselves with a halo. But what happens when we take off that halo from the mirror? Does that enable us to do the things we shunned before? In some cynical cases maybe. But really, I think understanding ourselves as not perfect human beings allows us to set the standards for morality higher and lets us strive to meet those standards.

Goodness is something we should constantly strive for or else we'll stall and become grandiose. I don't want to be good in life, I want to be better.