Does corruption exist because of free will? is it no more than a moral issue?, or is it that we don’t understand the ontology of such notions?. We think of corruption as an aberration, a problem, an abnormality, but what if it’s one side of an equation? one that requires us to take into consideration the its opposite. Corruption (political) for instance, is perceived as such because of the overarching idealism that enshrines human thought.
Corruption is ‘bad’ because we presuppose ‘order’ to be the norm. Corruption is just as prevalent as order, there has never been a corruption-free society. I would argue that the problem lies in the human mind itself, which insofar as corruption/disorder is concerned, testify to its finity. We spend so much time and resources thinking of ways to eliminate corruption, but not as much time asking “how conductive is the current system/way thing have been programmed to work to the very issue we’re trying to eliminate? (corruption)”. This ‘finity’ I speak off is made self-evident with the concept of time. The continued progress of existence tells us that much of life, much of us, is variable.
Our knowledge is bound by uncertainty just as our physical being is bound by senescence, both of which, subjects of time. We haven’t, within our limited inventory, the power of absolute knowledge, of timelessness so to speak, our knowledge, and by extension, our constructs ( the ideal ones at least), are always bedeviled by the problem of uncertainty which our reliance on methods (ironically) developed by us, like induction and extrapolation does little but provide an estimation, a prediction, an illusory sense of knowledge, because cluelessness, to us, is an unattractive prospect. The problem is much more complex than a textbook could ever wish to answer, however, the point is, corruption should be treated as a barometer which tells us more about the limitations and imperfections of our system, than about itself.