As humans, we are put into a very tough position, as we are the only known species who have the ability to think for ourselves and ask questions that make us question our very existence and reason for being in this world. Therefore, this burden of existence and the questions within all fall upon us to answer as humans. Our own moral compasses help to guide us to these answers, but can also make them more difficult at the same time as we are not all following the same compass. This means that we all individually need to come to our own conclusions for how we view the universe and all that happens within it.
Do two wrongs make a right? This is a very difficult concept for most to understand. On the surface, this seems very simple as we are told from a very young age that two wrongs don’t make a right. However, it’s when we get older that the understanding of this begins to fade. As we are all aware teenagers have the tendency to really react to their impulses without really thinking of the long term effects. So the whole concept of two wrongs don’t make a right doesn’t always cross our minds when we are reacting to these situations. I know for example if you were to get into a fight your first thought wouldn’t be, “Is this the right thing to do”, you would most likely fight back without thinking of the consequences as the adrenaline flooding your brain. So this brings up another question of whether in this hypothetical situation fighting back was the right thing to do. If we use the whole ideology that two wrongs don’t make a right it is an obvious answer… no, however, if we think critically in the situation and really look at the motives of the individuals it really makes use question whether it was a fair act. From fistfights to arguments there are always two sides of the story and a motive for each person’s reaction. So, in theory, this old saying is a very good one and it seems although it should be applied to every situation, it is easier said than done as in practice we are more prone to our impulses and acting on our prehistoric mindset of self-defense. So from what has been established the whole concept of “two wrongs don’t make a right” has a lot of variables and moral mazes to weave through in order to really draw a conclusion.
Albert Einstein’s law of relativity is one of the theories I feel can best help us to understand the concept of the whole question of whether two wrongs make a right. His theory basically states that the speed of time and how fast time is all relative to where you are in the world. This means that wherever you are will affect the speed at which time will have an impact on you. It may seem odd to bring up a theory by a famous scientist in an essay related nothing to science but if we use this whole theory and think of it as a metaphor it all begins to make sense. If we use the baseline of Einstein’s theory and put it into different context we get a meaning that is similar but also all-new. Every person is facing their own problems, burdens, and obstacles in life. This means that the way someone will react is all relative and can’t be measured on a scale as there is no baseline for a scale of this nature to be constructed. This also makes it very hard for us as outsiders to judge anybody’s reactions and say if they are right or wrong because we all have a different perception of what is right or wrong. Making it difficult to say that two wrongs don’t make a right, as what we consider right is vastly different than what the person beside us believes is right. The whole concept of moral integrity is relative to each person and follows no scientific principles making it nearly impossible to judge.
This brings me to my last point. Earlier I had compared our own moral values to a compass. You may ask what any of this has to do with a compass? Well if we think of the basic function of a compass it is to show you the correct way, similar to that of our own morals and personal beliefs guiding the decisions we make. So if we are asking if two wrongs make a right it really depends on each of our individual “compasses”. Although through history we have seen instances where the whole idea of this concept has worked and other times where it has not. Thus making the past an unreliable way to come up with an opinion on the matter. As Gandhi stated,” An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind” which is true in some cases however has some flaws in others, making it very hard to judge whether it is completely accurate. In cases such as war counteracting an attack is essential but with this example, it allows us to see a deeper truth to Gandhi’s words. He is not only speaking about the action itself but the consequences of that counteract or punch back. We need to really think about what will come of this situation such as poverty after the war. So really revenge, or two wrongs, may make you feel better at the time but it’s the events that follow these actions that will affect us. So we can see that there is a large truth to the statement, “Two wrongs don’t make a right”, but there are also flaws within it too. With all this in mind, it is really up to each individual person to draw their own conclusion to this concept and be guided by their moral compass.
So with all the evidence put forward can we come to a real conclusion? Personally, I feel that I can answer that question for myself. However, it is up to all of us as individuals to come up with our own conclusions and beliefs when it comes to these sorts of questions as what we believe is all relative to our own points of view and personal morals. As I stated before, we all have our own moral compasses within ourselves, meaning that no one is quite the same. So, with this in mind, I leave you with a proposition to look within yourself and draw your own conclusions to these mysteries of existence and really start to question and look deeper into the way you react to situations.