The question I have is, what should determine what is “right”? I will rely on a famous story to explain what I mean. About 2500 years ago Socrates was executed for crimes against the state and society. His crime essentially was that in trying to make sense of Athenian laws, customs, and values he made people, particularly his younger listeners, question and doubt social norms. As much as we idealize ancient Greece, it was not the most liberal place to challenge the status quo. One was especially expected to fully embrace Greek patriotic standards (since they were forever warring and so needing warriors), but really any skepticism might be met with punishment. In Greek society were many who had welcomed its loyalty standards, been educated to excel in them, and then had gone on to become effective within that established social system. Not only were they effective in the system, but their contributions to the system brought rewards and power. Their status in the system also gave them a means for judging others. If one lived up to Greek standards, one at least was acceptable; if one contributed to the Greek way of living, then even better. With this concept too one could determine who was above and who was below another. Those successful in the system were “above” those less successful in the system. But Socrates challenged the entire notion that judgments about good, bad, above, below, etc., could be genuinely decided on that basis. He would carefully reason out why relative truths such as this are not the best way to determine the highest standards. Now, more than two millennia later, the world has come to admire his insights and courage, as well as individuals who followed him (e.g., Plato and Aristotle) who were so influenced by his insights. But, at the time, he was “wrong.” How do we know? Because he was tried, convicted and executed by the people who were “right.” What made them right? What gave them the confidence to put him on trial, to accuse him, to kill him? Now, we might think it is different today, but it isn’t at all. Whomever has the power decides what is “right” because people think power gives them license to decide how things should be for the overall situation. Would it be good to have Socrates’ perspective prevail where people must work and play together, share, and make decisions? That is, to have some belief there is big Right and a little right, and the big Right shouldn't be violated by those tempted to use the power they have in relative situations to get their way, get unfair advantages for themselves, feel important, or decide important issues? What is ironic is that throughout history, those who’ve stood for the big Right have been regularly persecuted and murdered, yet it is also their standing up for the higher thing that is most responsible for whatever freedoms, intellectual possibilities, social compassion, and level of fairness we enjoy today in shared settings. If it had been left in the hands of the little righters, we'd still be living by pillage, rape and burn. What do you think?