What is good and what is bad depends on the degree of inclusivity or separation it creates.
I first judge a state that provides for me as good. If I look further and see that its organs and industries make this provision possible at the expense of other weaker countries and their inhabitants, then I no longer judge my provision to be quite so good. With regard to my fellow human beings. In terms of inclusiveness of action.
It is the same when the price demanded of me for this care does not allow my being to be in harmony. Then, too, the supply is no longer really good.
So it depends on whether an action or event is in harmony with us or the situation. If I drink clean water, then it is a harmonious event for my body. If I drink polluted water, then my body sets itself up to defend itself against harmful substances and perhaps even falls ill itself. If we are loved, nourished, protected, recognised, allowed to exist freely, then this is harmonious for our being. These are the basic needs of which one can say that all people feel this to be good. The person who makes this possible for others is acting well, is a good person.
Everything else beyond that is just opinion. Maybe I like cars, or the military, or coffee, or vegan sausages, clear announcements, romantic films….. There is also something that harmonises with me. But only with my personal views. Others may find exactly that bad. Here we are in the realm of the argument about what is good or bad.
As far as basic needs are concerned, it is good if you make this possible for your family, include them and let them exist in harmony. Super good is when you extend this to all people. Super super good if you include the animals and plants and allow them to exist in harmony with all of us. And it is mega good if one extends this all-inclusive desire for harmony – and the corresponding action – to the whole cosmos. Then one is in the perception of the All-Oneness. All is I and so all shall exist harmoniously and well. Universal all-inclusive egoism, so to speak.
In contrast to this is the so-called „evil“, which acts in the exact opposite way. For whatever reasons. I don’t want to discuss them here now. He knows no harmony, only separation. Even within himself. Since he knows nothing of harmony and unity, he can only act in a separating way. He is in constant pain and sees himself separated from everything and everyone. He is always in a fight for his survival. Against everyone else. That is why he acts exclusively for himself and whether other people benefit or are harmed, it is all the same to him and lies only in the question of how useful one or the other scenario is for him. Therefore, in the long run, he destroys everything around him and himself.
One can say that the „evil“ person acts „badly“ because he does not know the least thing about the „good“. He is not „consciously“ „evil“. He is without knowledge of the „good“ of the all-inclusive and therefore striving for harmony. Without this recognition, the only option left to him is to act „evil“. For there is nothing more to experience. Separation and unity. In the most diverse gradations.
The all-inclusive is on the extreme one side. The „evil“ on the extreme other….
Thus the all-inclusive no longer knows any separation between himself and everything else that exists in the world or in the cosmos. There is only him and that is maximum harmony.
The „evil one“, on the other hand, is alone and for him there is only him and an infinite number of things and beings outside of him. That is maximum loneliness, maximum pain. Maximum fear. Maximum anger. Maximum hatred. He feels maximum exclusion and wants to be rid of all his tormentors, the whole cosmos, and realise his oneness in his loneliness without being thrown again and again into his pain of separation by external things.
To dissolve the pain of separation in humanity, that is the most important goal we must all serve.