people are good

[ketostix]

This is what the glass is half full people refuse to acknowledge.

I am neither a "glass is half full" nor a "glass is half empty" guy, as these folks would like to believe. I am a "glass contains 50% of it's available volume" kind of guy. You and several others seem to be the same way. Unfortunately we will never be accepted for who we are, we will always be called "jaded" and "pessimists" and such.

Oh well, so be it.

Yeah that's how I tend to see things. I see the glass as half full when the trend is for things to be going postive, and half empty when things are trending negatively, and containing 50% of it's volume when trending neutral or it's indetereminate what is happening, so sort of a realist approach if that makes sense. I like to believe I see things positively, negatively or neutrally depending on the available information.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Well yeah it goes to motivation (I believe doing good solely for the sake of feeling good is generally a faultless motivation) and it goes to the degree of benefit/harm to those involved in the situation. I don't personally believe most people are good. I think most people are a mix of good and bad. But you do have people who fall on the extremes of being good and bad. Everyone has a self-interest and there's nothing wrong with that. Selfishness assumes an overly degree of self-interest-to a degree that doesn't really benefit any parties involved.

Ever notice that the people who question a person's motivation are typically those who didn't benefit from the person's actions? The people who do benefit seldom question the person's motive.

 

[ketostix]

Ever notice that the people who question a person's motivation are typically those who didn't benefit from the person's actions? The people who do benefit seldom question the person's motive.

I would say if you mean by not benefiting they were harmed then they have a good reason to question the other person's motives. I think most interaction can be win-win or a fair trade. However, I believe 3rd parties will question someone's motivation often times regardless of what the other parties are doing. Most people have an intuitive sense of what's fair whether they admit or accepted it or not. But I do agree that most people are happiest with getting the advantage.

 

[joekerr31]

well i'd argue that the glass is basically full and that most people are actually trying to fill up a second, third, fourth or even fifth glass.

most of us have a roof over our head, our health, food, a car, a job, family, etc.

and most people in the world wish us no harm. most people won't rob you, or steal from you, etc.

i just think its silly to dismiss all the good in the world because sometimes when you do something good you get rewarded for it. the guy who did the personal training for free got some publicity, but i bet you'd find he's the kind of guy whose done a hundred good things for free and never got any praise for it.

the reality is that peopel who do good, just do it. they don't think it through. the ones who think it through are typically too busy with their various schemes to bother taking on something like a good deed has the possibility of not getting anything monetary in return in the end.

 

[Tazman]

I don't really think anyone is debating the fact that someone who does what's considered a "good" deed for the benefit of feeling good is necessarily a "selfish" person in the negative, but that the act in and of itself is done with the "expectation" of feeling good, proud, noble, etc.

In this sense, there is no such thing as "altruism", or better yet, you will probably never know. Everyone behaves a certain way to get what they want, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate good deeds.

I try to surround myself with people who are good at reciprocation. When I hold a door open for someone I appreciate a "thank you". If I lend you money I expect you to make atleast some effort to pay me back or set up an arrangement so that I'm not left thinking you're just taking advantage.

If I behave pleasantly and friendly toward you I expect the same in return otherwise why would I refer to you as a "friend", etc. I like being around people who do things that benefit others because they enjoy feeling good, and I feel that way myself from time to time, but I wouldn't call it "selfless" in absolute terms because even if the reward isn't tangible, it's still a reward.

 

[feelingloved]

Joe

I'm not sure what you are asking. About are people good?

"Lack of good" termed evil. There is no good without its absence ; lack of good. Good is contextual.
We universally accept that pain is bad & pleasure is good. And this is how we judge goodness; cascading more pleasure than pain, and to whom.

When big cats kill or mosquitoes spread disease, is that evil, or good?
We call that nature.
Animals fight territorially to the death. Females leave the beta for the alphas.

However if humans hunt the same big cat prey to extinction... or propagate plagues of mosquito diseases, we see that as evil. ..Because we should know better. When we war and cheat, and selectively choose & reject spouses, we try to justify. Is it good or evil? We judge because we are enlightened. We are aware of the pain and pleasure caused by our actions. Our awareness is the knowledge of good and evil.

And though we have eaten of the tree, the religions ask us not to judge. Be one with all. It seems a contrast. A contradiction.

Evil and good only exist when there is awareness. Otherwise it would be nature.
Most people are not aware.
So it makes no sense to judge their actions.
J said, on the cross, "Forgive them for they know not what they do."
With an enlightened, aware and consciously awake, soul, actions are either altruistic or selfish. IE a person has either evil or good intent. This leads to the development of the soul.
Some of us come here and develop a very high level of empathy. We sympathize. We heal. We encourage. And our souls develop in that direction. Others peruse pain as a play thing. And this is a round about way to empathy. There are watchers, healers, and controllers. And they are all on the path to consciousness, and awareness of creation/universality.

Are people good?
A certain category AFCs treat their GF extra special all the time. If they are aware of their sacrifice and they give out of love, and empathy, is that good? Its just a question.

BTW Joekerr31, I also read your posts on the recently revived thread. And I must say I also was thinking you were a demi-god. Your insights are so clear and healing. It is such a treasure.
I am interested in your mp3s that you have to share. or anyone else for that matter.

 

[joekerr31]

BTW Joekerr31, I also read your posts on the recently revived thread. And I must say I also was thinking you were a demi-god. Your insights are so clear and healing. It is such a treasure.

haha, im not demigod thats for sure. just a guy whose read some interesting thinkers along the way.

this thread has been enlightening to me. like in politics things tend to get polarized. left wing versus right wing.

i've drifted to the left wing of sosuave i think. im really into the positive of life. and i wasnt always this way. but ive come to realize that time is going to just keep passing by. that when im 90 years old and dying the world will probably still be just as much a mess as it is today. so really you can't sit on the fence forever. at some point you have to ask yourself... 'am i going to be a force for good in this world, and really embrace that attitude towards life. am i going to acknowledg the darkness but then burn as bright as i can to light up the darkness around me, not just for myself but for others as well. OR am i going to give in to the darkness and become one with it. am i going to see the world as a hostile place and focus on defensive strategies - am i just going to look out for #1 (which is the very attitude that creates the darkness if you ask me). "

ironically, the very debate we have had in this thread is similar to what is going on in american politics right now. fight the war or bring the troops home. offensive military or defensive military. etc.

which is why i accept that what im saying will be embraced by some and seen as silly romanticism by others.

i read a quote recently that went something like "You can't bomb the world into peace." and sure, some would turn around and go 'you have to show them you are strong. they must fear you otherwise they will attack you."

i guess im kind of middle fo the road. i think you have to go out into the world and preach peace at every turn but also be prepared in the case when you are attacked. but i think you have to take the road of peace and only 'fight' when you ahve to. and just like in life, i think you should go out and love the world around you and be a force for good and only 'fight' when you have to. i mean, im not saying if someone attacks your family to 'love' them, thats absurd, you should defend them. but i think we should be 'defensive' in appropriate circumstances, not ALL the time.

im beginning to realize that life is much simplier than we think. at least our choices in it are. and this is also what i think einstein was saying. you have a choice - are you going to spend your time here being a part of the good and adding to it, or are you going to focus on the bad and let it inhibit your enjoyment of life.

i also think there are way more people out there who are damn good people. way more than we realize.

 

[feelingloved]

Go Ron Paul, by the way.

Defense comes first. Then look to shedding light. I do think you can come under attack when trying to do spiritual good. Be wise and look after yourself. Take a breather. Drop the "agro" so to speak, until negativity sets its focus elsewhere, off you.

 

[feelingloved]

I think you are asking an "either/or" question. Should you "go with light or defense".

It reminds me of a quote from Jurassic Park , "Life will find a way".

I think goodness will find a way. I think there is a way to burn bright in the darkness with a full set of adequate defenses.

I do not know your scenario, specifically.
But one thing I was dwelling on is the subject of "getting" another guy's girl. Some guys would see this as defensive. and contributes to our darkness.
But I believe there is a way to get what you need, while being a beacon of light.
I do not have the answers. But the universe does. And I trust in that.

A lot of sad things have happened to me. But I am very fortunate, and that includes finding this forum. And its things like this which reinforce my belief that "goodness is at work" if you can have faith to endure its path/pace & principle.

 

[Luthor Rex]

This is what the glass is half full people refuse to acknowledge.

I am neither a "glass is half full" nor a "glass is half empty" guy, as these folks would like to believe. I am a "glass contains 50% of it's available volume" kind of guy. You and several others seem to be the same way. Unfortunately we will never be accepted for who we are, we will always be called "jaded" and "pessimists" and such.

Oh well, so be it.

Do not try to discover if the glass is half full or half empty. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.

The Truth?

There is no glass.

Then you'll see, that it is not the glass that has volume, it is only yourself.

 

[Luthor Rex]

We universally accept that pain is bad & pleasure is good. And this is how we judge goodness; cascading more pleasure than pain, and to whom.

I do not accept this at all.

Some see this lie for what it is.

How then shall you rule us?

The seduction of pleasure shall not draw me and the cracking of pain shall not compel me.

No boy, you shall not ever rule a man.

Let your false values remain in the world of lies where they belong.

:rockon:

 

[feelingloved]

Twice I've gotten into a situation where I was starving for a month. For the longest time, my main aim was to have enough money to be able to eat whatever I want. I pretty much got that now.
You know its bad when you start thinking about cooking your cat! LOL
Thank you for Reminding me of that blessing.

Luthor Rex, what is your definition of "good"?
If it is not "consciously causing more wellness than harm", then what is it?

 

[Quiksilver]

There's a homeless guy who sleeps on the sidewalk half a block from my home. For about 3 weeks, since it's been getting very cold, I bring him a medium coffee every morning on the way to classes.

I don't do it because I feel guilty and obligated to... I do it because I know people have a better outlook on life and are more able to change their life when they know that someone else cares about them, and acknowledges their existence.

With my dad, every morning on the way to work for the longest time, there was a homeless guy who was different from others. Instead of being out in the intersection begging for change at red lights, he'd be curled up in a blanket reading books most of the time.

For about a year, every monday morning my dad would toss the guy an old book he'd already read from the car window.

--

I believe 'goodness' is a willingness to do something helpful for no other reason than empathy. Some people help out of guilt, out of alterior motivations, out of respect... but there are people who help because they would rather not see a person in a particular unfortunate situation.

I know I shouldn't be posting here, but this is another topic that i have strong opinions about.

edit: after reading some more of the thread I do agree with jokerr in this. The fact that someone gets rewarded either internally or externally for doing a good deed makes them selfish?

To the other side of this debate... Try thinking of it this way: If somebody felt a sharp pain followed by stress after doing something good for somebody(instead of the other way around), then would people still do those good things?

 

[Mr.Positive]

There's a homeless guy who sleeps on the sidewalk half a block from my home. For about 3 weeks, since it's been getting very cold, I bring him a medium coffee every morning on the way to classes.

I don't do it because I feel guilty and obligated to... I do it because I know people have a better outlook on life and are more able to change their life when they know that someone else cares about them, and acknowledges their existence.

With my dad, every morning on the way to work for the longest time, there was a homeless guy who was different from others. Instead of being out in the intersection begging for change at red lights, he'd be curled up in a blanket reading books most of the time.

For about a year, every monday morning my dad would toss the guy an old book he'd already read from the car window.

--

I believe 'goodness' is a willingness to do something helpful for no other reason than empathy. Some people help out of guilt, out of alterior motivations, out of respect... but there are people who help because they would rather not see a person in a particular unfortunate situation.

I know I shouldn't be posting here, but this is another topic that i have strong opinions about.

edit: after reading some more of the thread I do agree with jokerr in this. The fact that someone gets rewarded either internally or externally for doing a good deed makes them selfish?

To the other side of this debate... Try thinking of it this way: If somebody felt a sharp pain followed by stress after doing something good for somebody(instead of the other way around), then would people still do those good things?

Before some posters flame you for being "selfish" Quicksilver. I'd like to re-emphasis a point made earlier..

We talk a lot on this board about being men of action. Doing things, achieving our goals, and dreams, and it's all about outcomes.

Regardless of whatever reason you do this Quicksilver....bottom line, that homeless man has coffee in the morning and I would be willing to bet, you brighten his day by giving it to him.

And that my friends, is the outcome of doing a good deed. It doesn't matter the reason why.

Very cool Quicksilver.

 

[iqqi]

I think that there are some people who feel like "we are all in this together" so they are kinder to strangers, and then there are those who feel like it is all men for themselves, and only see things as give and take.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

So...I see yet ANOTHER war of ideas rages on here...

Well, I will enter the fray long enough to only say this:

Whatever a man focuses on----becomes MAGNIFIED. And whatever a man DOES NOT focus on---------tends to SHRINK from view----from even his PERIPHERAL vision.

For deep down, HOW people see themselves...is usually the way they see others----and THE WORLD around them.

And NO thread that I've read on this board illustrates this point better than this one.

 

[Luthor Rex]

Along with that, the problem with saying people only act in their self-interest is that it implicates that no one cares. Ever.

This is some of the critical stuff the pro-altruism side isn't 'getting', and it's subtle and some of the pro-selfish side doesn't help things in this manner.

A lot of times when debating 'dangerous ideas' what is unsaid is more critical than what is actually said. For example, very soon the evidence mounting in the genetic record will show some things very uncomfortable to the modern mind.

Things like:

Intelligence and other mental aptitudes are NOT evenly distributed across race or gender due to biology.

Real racial difference do exist, like differing amounts of testosterone among males of various races.

There is evidence that a certain flavor of Jews really are smarter because of selection pressure on their group. (I bet you didn't know Jews came in flavors.)

Men prefer machines and computers, while women prefer relationships because each gender was born with a different kind of brain.

And a lot more on the way...

But these ideas aren't 'dangerous' because they are false: but rather because if they are true they will overturn the modern sensibilities.

So if the Jews really are smarter does that mean they should exterminate us?

If the black man really is born with naturally higher levels of testosterone does that mean we should have blacks fight all our wars for us?

If women really are all touch-feeley does that mean they should shut up and get back to the kitchen?

Give me a break.

The only thing that all human motivation being selfish implies is that... all human motives are selfish. Beyond that there are plenty of hairs to be split.

 

[Luthor Rex]

So...I see yet ANOTHER war of ideas rages on here...

Well, I will enter the fray long enough to only say this:

Whatever a man focuses on----becomes MAGNIFIED. And whatever a man DOES NOT focus on---------tends to SHRINK from view----from even his PERIPHERAL vision.

For deep down, HOW people see themselves...is usually the way they see others----and THE WORLD around them.

And NO thread that I've read on this board illustrates this point better than this one.

I know you're a Bible guy, and I have no interest in starting a evolution versus creation argument.

But could you at least take me at my word when I say that my belief that all human behavior has ultimately selfish motives because I think that is what the evidence of evolution shows us, and that it has nothing to do with my feelings?

Denying human nature won't make things better... understanding it better will. Understanding that we have a predisposition to obey authority even when it orders us to commit murder and torture will help give rise to social structures to prevent these very things.

If we really have this predisposition (and several creepy experiments show that we do) then we could condition people ahead of time to know when to disobey authority.

Please! I'd buy the world a fvckin' Coke if I thought it would make a difference!

 

[aliasguy]

So...I see yet ANOTHER war of ideas rages on here...

Well, I will enter the fray long enough to only say this:

Whatever a man focuses on----becomes MAGNIFIED. And whatever a man DOES NOT focus on---------tends to SHRINK from view----from even his PERIPHERAL vision.

For deep down, HOW people see themselves...is usually the way they see others----and THE WORLD around them.

And NO thread that I've read on this board illustrates this point better than this one.

I like your Pattonesque exhortations a lot, VU. They are inspirational and affirming. I enjoy reading them, and I almost always derive a lot of good feeling, positivity, and 'forward looking" vibe from them.

But you let us down, here. You sound like an astrologer, or a Tarot reader. You seem to project some kind of "magical" quality in this post. It's like you are saying that unless I/we see things YOUR way ("positivity" in our views of others), then we are seeing OURSELVES as "negative."

Well, I don't believe I have to be "negative" myself to see "negative" things in the world. Simply having low expectations of others doesn't mean that I have to have low expectations of myself. I know that this isn't EXACTLY what you wrote, but it SEEMS implied in your post. It's like you are saying that if I see the world as a dangerous place, where one must be on guard, then I am ALSO saying that I am a dangerous man, against whom OTHERS must be on guard. Again, I know that's not what you said, but it follows.

I would assert that I'm a pretty good guy, and I treat others pretty well, with NO expectation of reciprocity. At the same time, I don't expect that life/the world/other people are going to be as kind to me as I may be to them/it. And that's OK. I accept that, and offer no complaint.

I just refuse to EXPECT kindness, goodness, etc., from others. It's just a bad bet. But it DOESN'T mean that I have to be an ASSH*LE, too. I can choose to be kind, and just, and giving, even if I see that things generally suck out there in the real world; it just isn't realistic to expect more from others. And I CANNOT demand to be repaid in kind; that would be foolish or silly. The world is a rough place, and I have to be ready for that, but recognizing and accepting that fact doesn't make me a "bad guy."


Simply seeing and recognizing evil/bad/whatever out there in the world doesn't make he who sees it necessarily "bad" himself.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

Yo Luther Rex and AliasGuy,


No disrespect meant. Also, my apologies for any offense taken due to any misinterpretation of the spirit of my post.

In my previous post, my definitive stance on this issue was actually left "unstated". Simply because my views on the subject are so far, shall we say..."COMPLICATED". But in the interest of clarity, and to be more succinct:

Right now, I am currently leaning toward the opinion that the "good" or "evil" inherent in any given person may be more of a matter of degrees than it is a fact of absolutes...

But, admittedly, I'm still mulling it all over at the moment. So if I have anything I think that's more substantive to add here in the future, I will. Because I find this thread to be very interesting, the passions it has stirred in many of the posters actually surprises me...

And also, my previous post was meant to imply nothing more than we all see the world through the lens or our own individual perspectives----composed primarily of our life experiences, the things we've been taught, the things we believe in-----and the things we DON'T.

Mine is not a mindset of one who denies REALITY. But far from it...

I am as equally aware that DARKNESS falls----as I am that the SUN also rises.

But I must also admit, that I DO have a concern that many men here seem to somehow equate negativity with REALITY and positivity with FANTASY. I believe this particular way of thinking tends to be at best erroneous, and at worst, a twisted, subtle form of condescending arrogance----displayed toward any who may tend to think differently.

Rather, to me, it would seem that both positive AND negative make up the whole of LIFE----the completeness of REALITY.

Oh, and one more thing, AliasGuy:

I actually agree with you that the "world" IS a dangerous place...History has bourne this out. Proven time and time again by the fact that, so far----------------nobody seems to have been able to make it out of here ALIVE.