people are good

[Luthor Rex]

As said earlier, while now the topic have moved away from that, there are implications in swallowing all motivations are inherently selfish. You can't have one without the other. If all of a person's motives are selfish, than there's no way a person to care, because caring for another does not fit with selfishness. How can one care for another while everything is about himself? It is mutually exclusive.

Go read 'Atlas Shrugged' ... really.

Even if all of my motives are ultimately selfish I am still able to love. The proximate experience for us does not change knowing what our ultimate motives actually are.

What is love for a human being? Love is when you expand your sphere of selfishness to include another. Most people are possessive of their property and ther mates: that is because they have expanded the concept of "I" to include another.

Of course there is more to it than that, but there's the basic idea.

While I don't agree with everything Rand has to say, she has very interesting views on such things. When Rand says 'selfishness' she often means something along the lines of 'self-interest'.

Love, friendship, respect, admiration are the emotional response of one man to the virtues of another, the spiritual payment given in exchange for the personal, selfish pleasure which one man derives from the virtues of another man's character. Only a brute or an altruist would claim that the appreciation of another person's virtues is an act of selflessness, that as far as one's own selfish interest and pleasure are concerned, it makes no difference whether one deals with a genius or a fool, whether one meets a hero or a thug, whether one marries an ideal woman or a slut.

Romantic love, in the full sense of the term, is an emotion possible only to the man (or woman) of unbreached self-esteem: it is his response to his own highest values in the person of another—an integrated response of mind and body, of love and sexual desire. Such a man (or woman) is incapable of experiencing a sexual desire divorced from spiritual values.

Man is an end in himself. Romantic love—the profound, exalted, lifelong passion that unites his mind and body in the sexual act—is the living testimony to that principle.

(Selfless love) would have to mean that you derive no personal pleasure or happiness from the company and the existence of the person you love, and that you are motivated only by self-sacrificial pity for that person's need of you. I don't have to point out to you that no one would be flattered by, nor would accept, a concept of that kind. Love is not self-sacrifice, but the most profound assertion of your own needs and values. It is for your own happiness that you need the person you love, and that is the greatest compliment, the greatest tribute you can pay to that person.

However, if you it might be acceptable to say self-interest is the core of all motivation if semantics and connotations with some flexibility on the word is allowed. One could say he is "interested" in another, though that a loose view of self-interest.

Looking back at my posts I am guilty of making it seem like I think selfishness is the same as self-interest. It's not at all the same. There is no viciousness in 'self-interest' like the word 'selfish' implies.

It is in everyone's self-interest to eat, and sleep; you'll die without them. Just because sleep is in my self-interest doesn't mean that every time I doze off that someone somewhere will suffer for it.

 

[STR8UP]

This debate is still raging? Jeez....

Ok, here's something for you to chew on.

Are women "good" or "bad" when it comes to dealing with men?

How many relationships fail? Almost all of them. When they do fail, is the woman usually looking out for you or her? She is looking out for herself, grabbing onto the next branch, cutting you off like a festering appendage as soon as she has secured a new source of attention, validation, and intimacy.

Is this all women? No, but it is MOST women.

They "love" you as long as it suits them. They will shower you with gifts. they will stay up all night for you even when they have to work in the morning. They will cook you a nice dinner. They will tell you "I love you so much I don't know what i would ever do without you" And it feels fukking GREAT. What a good and wonderful woman to perform such acts of kindness!

Then one day she wakes up and feels just a little bit different. She begins to lose attraction for you. And as time passes the attraction fades more and more. So she starts to distance herself from you. And she sits there and rationalizes her behavior. "He just doesn't pay enough attention to me any more!"

So, if almost all relationships end, and most end badly, and most of the breakups are CAUSED by a woman who loses attraction, are women good or bad?

Well, if I looked at things the way the rose garden crowd does, I would have to acknowledge that the vast majority of the evidence points to them being "bad". Maybe if you are in a good relationship you might argue differently, but being outside of a good relationship you would have to see them in a negative light if presented with the facts and analyzing them from YOUR standpoint.

I believe that most men would be reluctant to call women in general "good". So why do you say that PEOPLE are generally good? you don't call them good because you can more clearly see it for male/female relations for what they are. They are adversarial. They are dog eat dog, where there are rarely two winners.

So, fellas, most of you who are on the "people are good" bandwagon are the same ones who believe in 'good' women vs. 'bad' women.

You say "You just need to find yourself a good woman! They are few and far between but they DO exist".

You ACKNOWLEDGE the existence of "good" versus "bad", but in that context you tell us that most women aren't "good". How to you reconcile this?

I know what you're gonna say. You're gonna say that you are talking about women who are good for YOU versus bad for YOU. Uhuh....ain't buying it. Come up with a better way to explain it. Cause in another thread you will talk about how most women are "undateable" which in MY mind would mean that they tend to be very selfish, which equals "bad". Not the same thing as the good and bad you talk about when talking about people in general, but we aren't talking apples to oranges comparison here. there is a parallel.

How do you explain playing both sides of the fence?

 

[Gerard-890]

Str8up that's a great analogy, but the shoe can fit on both the feet of men and women.

You asked, "How many women will do this and that..." basically you are a GOOD MAN saying there's not many GOOD WOMEN.

Well the shoe fits on the other foot also, because there's many GOOD WOMEN who say there aren't any GOOD MEN.

The problem in both scenerios is the "good" person's delusion. The delusion of being a so called "great person" who keeps finding "not so great" people when the fact of the matter is:

1.) Women who say there aren't any good men, tend to have become ACCUSTOMED to CHOOSING the men that they SAY aren't so great. Well, they must have been great enough for you to CHOOSE them right? Was there not any other men in the area that caught your eye?

2.) Same for the men who say there aren't many good women, any ACCUSTOM.

We get in a habit of CHOOSING the wrong things for us, then complain about the WRONG things we chose, why keep choosing the SAME THINGS?

It's like saying that "ALL Stocks" are hard to make money with, but you continue to invest in the "Same Stocks" or invest in the "Same Fashion" like you've done for years.

How can you expect a DIFFERENT RESULT doing the same darn thing?

I believe that JoeKerr's initial point of "people are good" is more correct than wrong as he puts it out, as majority of people aren't trying to screw you over, they might have problems of their own, but they aren't ness. trying to put you down to get ahead.

I think at the end of the day, like I stated before, once we all strive to be the best WE PERSONALLY can be I think not only do we become better people but we also inspire others to do the same.

 

[joekerr31]

They "love" you as long as it suits them.

I believe that most men would be reluctant to call women in general "good". So why do you say that PEOPLE are generally good? you don't call them good because you can more clearly see it for male/female relations for what they are. They are adversarial. They are dog eat dog, where there are rarely two winners.

You ACKNOWLEDGE the existence of "good" versus "bad", but in that context you tell us that most women aren't "good". How to you reconcile this?

How do you explain playing both sides of the fence?

whoooo nelly, slow down a second. how the hell did you equate 'love' with 'good'. a woman is only good if she keeps loving you?

if you loved yourself and didn't need her love, then you would realize that if she walks away from you, or if she screws things up with you, it is HER that has lost out. she has hurt herself NOT you. what im hearing is 'i want to be loved and since no one really loves me for me, they are all selfish bad people." (ponder the irony of that statement for a moment).

the only way she can hurt you is if you become overly dependent on her to cope with life and then when she leaves you can't cope and hence hate her and she becomes 'bad'.

whereas if you were strong and independent you would pity her, becuase you would see that she has just lost out on a good thing.

and i stated this in an earlier part of this thread - that the most common form of 'bad' is self destructive behavior. many 'good' people hurt others when they hurt themselves.

and one more important points - relationships are a very poor measurement of human capacity for good or bad. the reason being that in relationships most people lose all common sense and become slaves to out of control emotions.

we don't call people who have a psychotic breakdown and literally lose their minds 'guilty'. we dont throw them in jail because they were insane at the time (literally not in control of their actions), we throw them in the mental ward instead.

similarly, i don't think we can judge good and bad using intimate relationships as the basis, because people are often in a delusional uncontrolled emotional state and behave as they normally would not.

i'm talking your average joe, on the street, is generally a good person. if you were omnipotent and could stop each passerbye on the street, and know their life story, and know them as a person, inside and out, and were to pass judgement on them in terms of all in all whether they were a good or bad person - i'd hazard to guess that 9 out of 10 you'd judge them as being much more good than bad.

the only thing that shocks me in this thread (although it shouldn't, because i believe its a mass delusion at play) is the degree to which people fervently hold to the notion that most people are not good. or that most people only care about one thing and thats their own interest.

i do not believe this is the world we are living in. although i do believe many people believe it is.

 

[Gerard-890]

JoeKerr many people are good, it's the struggles and challenges that they are having in their own personal and professional lives that WHEN they look out on the world and SEE no one giving them a HAND, they conclude "I'm all alone."

It's like Str8up and some of the others when they say most women are BAD, really what they are saying is that they were having struggles with the relationships they had and NO ONE would reach out and help.

Well the reason NO ONE comes to your rescue is because most people are just like you, IN NEED OF SAVING.

We all have our individual challenges and struggles that we must learn to defeat everyday, but a person can become bitter BECAUSE there's a challenge in the way COMBINED with looking to others and the others not offering a hand.

Again, I keep saying this.....we as a people must learn to just meet our challenges head on and STOP trying to have other people bail us out.

1.) Women are women, period. We talk down about women alot on this forum and talk about what they should be, when in reality there's nothing really wrong with women. So what if she's not everything you IMAGINED her to be? She's been this way for years and quite honestly knows NOTHING about your internal fantasies, how can you expect her to accomodate so quickly?

2.) Same goes for our other relationships.

JoeKerr made a post a while ago that talked about appreciation, we don't appreciate a damn thing anymore guys. All we do is have negative views of the world, look at all of the things that are WRONG, hard to DEFEAT, etc, etc...the bottom line is that there's someone on the street corner without the basic ness. of shelter and clothing. There's someone on the street corner without the basic ness. of food, and you have the nerve to be sitting in your warm house on your high speed internet computer UPSET over a woman not fulfilling your FANTASY?

JoeKerr is right, ALL PEOPLE ARE GOOD. They aren't trying to find ways to screw you over, they are trying to find ways to DEFEAT THE CHALLENGES in their own lives.

Think about this?

Have you ever heard women speak on men? It's funny, but a lot fo the things we say at the "boys club" about women, women say at the "girl's club" about men. How we are so "right" and they are so "wrong."

The problem is that we have a INTERNAL VIEW of how a parituclar person or group should be, and that particular person or group has NO FRIGGIN CLUE what you EXPECT them to be, NOR do they most times know how to BE that person you expect them to be, and this begs another question, why in the hell DO I HAVE TO BE WHAT YOU WANT ME TO BE??

That's why I said, let's focus on defeating our challenges and being the best we can be, only then do we make the world a better place.

NO ONE PERSON can satisfy you, we are too hard to satisfy, it takes a complete WHOLENESS in multiple areas of life to become even partially satisfied. So stop blaming women for your lack of peace, they are just one piece of the puzzle.

I must conclude with this, see if you can "catch me," rather you believe it or not, welfare doesn't make life better, welfare makes life harder because you are always WITHOUT waiting on a HAND OUT.

Okay, I'm rambling again.

 

[STR8UP]

Before I go to sleep, just for the record, I NEVER said "people are bad".

All I said was that stating "people are good" is no more or less true than stating "people are bad".

Civilization as we know it would cease to exist if people were good or bad. Do you guys really not see this? you can put a positive spin on ANYTHING, but at the end of the day everything "just is".

 

[joekerr31]

gerard, great post.

this is partly why understanding that the world is filled with good people is essential to being the best you that you can be. when you stop seeing others as impedements and realize that generally speaking they have no desire to harm you - they are too busy dealing with their own problems. heck, if anything, if they know how and have the resources to, they will help you in whatever way they can.

when you start to believe this, you start to take full responsibility for your life.

but when you believe that the world is filled with greedy self serving individuals who will screw you over if the reward for their own self interest is big enough, it becomes VERY easy to blame the state of your life or your emotional outlook on OTHERS.

now, IF others truly were 'bad', then this would be practical. but they aren't!

now, IF you find yourself in a maximum security jail, then yes, this is a good view to hold. the guy with the swaztika tattooed in his forehead who is holding out his **** screaming 'I'm going to f*ck you like its 1999!" is probably not 'good'.

but assuming that every day people that you encounter are not 'good' is absurd - since most of them actually are good. it doesn't mean they are going to empty out their bank accounts so that you can buy a porsche. but it does mean that most of them are good people who try to do the right thing as they go through life.

but like i say, everyone has been 'hurt' by someone, if not multiple people in life, and as a result some people withdraw into their mental cacoons, lock their doors and walk through life with their finger on the trigger ready to shoot if anyone so much as looks at them the wrong way.

but i thing Ger, you are bang on the money in your most recent post.

 

[joekerr31]

Before I go to sleep, just for the record, I NEVER said "people are bad".

All I said was that stating "people are good" is no more or less true than stating "people are bad".

Civilization as we know it would cease to exist if people were good or bad. Do you guys really not see this? you can put a positive spin on ANYTHING, but at the end of the day everything "just is".

well if 80% of people are law abiding, honest, caring people generally trying to live 'good' lives and 20% of the people are self centered *ssholes who would steal your money, f*ck your wife and then drink your last beer, then stating 'people are good' is not more or less true than stating 'people are bad'.

now if it was a 50/50 ratio of decent folks to theiving wife f*ckers, then it both statements would be more or less true.

this is the whole point of the thread is to say that its nowhere near as bad as 50/50. now, im not saying everyone is a saint. but you don't have to be perfect to be 'good'. and most people are good. not all for sure, but way more are than we think.

 

[iqqi]

I am so proud of Gerard.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Originally Posted by Ayn Rand ...

Oh great, another chick has joined the forum....

 

[ketostix]

JoeKerr is right, ALL PEOPLE ARE GOOD. They aren't trying to find ways to screw you over, they are trying to find ways to DEFEAT THE CHALLENGES in their own lives.

Think about this?

Have you ever heard women speak on men? It's funny, but a lot fo the things we say at the "boys club" about women, women say at the "girl's club" about men. How we are so "right" and they are so "wrong."

The problem is that we have a INTERNAL VIEW of how a parituclar person or group should be, and that particular person or group has NO FRIGGIN CLUE what you EXPECT them to be, NOR do they most times know how to BE that person you expect them to be, and this begs another question, why in the hell DO I HAVE TO BE WHAT YOU WANT ME TO BE??

This doesn't sound reality based at all. There definitely are people who are trying to screw others over and to say they're just "trying to defeat the challenges in their own lives" is a cop out. Also, I don't know how anyone can compare what women demand of men vs. what men demand or expect from women. That's almost absurd. Does anyone ever really put any demands or expectations on women in this society?

I think this thread's debate was settled for good a page or two back, i.e.: People are a mix of good and bad along a continuum (some people are worse and some are better), most people operate from the principle of reciprocation so if you are good to others most of the time but not all the time they will reciprocate, some people do good things because they believe in doing good while others do bad things because they believe that's the way to go..

 

[Interceptor]

Potbelly,
actually I don't think he was doing that at all.
I think he was shedding light on the limitations of a human's capacity for reasoning such an awesome topic such as God.
In other words, human intellect may not be fully capable of fully realizing this in our mind in its truest form.

 

[feelingloved]

" I just want to add, that if evil is absence of AWARENESS, and the lower animals are not, as you say, as "aware" as us, then why aren't nature itself, and all those "unaware animals" evil, while all the men over the ages which may be considered (at least by many) to be "evil" were able to read, speak, write, explain themselves, etc. ? Those guys KNEW what they were doing. Does that make them not evil? But an eagle, following its instincts, and plucking a fish from the water --- it's not "aware," so it IS evil????? How does this work? Am I misunderstanding you even MORE????"

Good vs evil stem from intent & success/failure to connect.

When the sun swells up and burns this planet to a crisp, is that evil? No, there is no intent.
When one animal species hunts another to extinction is that evil? No, there is no choice.

Without potential for awareness, without potential for good, there can be no evil. Nature, without awareness is neither good or evil.
Good and bad things can happen. Yes, like droughts.
We have awareness. We have eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. We have potential for empathy.
When we choose to be self absorbed, rather than empathetic, .. When we raze the planet with nukes, and cause species extinction, it is evil.

Natural events cause life and well being, and the lack of life and well being. But that is not good or evil. Good comes from the choice to do something above and beyond the default state.
Evil is the power to do so, but choosing to live reactively rather than connectively.

Remain empathetic.

 

[joekerr31]

Natural events cause life and well being, and the lack of life and well being. But that is not good or evil. Good comes from the choice to do something above and beyond the default state.
Evil is the power to do so, but choosing to live reactively rather than connectively.

Remain empathetic.

good also stems from what is ultimately in our best interest. if everyone being 'evil' was in our best interest, then most people would be evil.

but it doesn't work, because we are all sharing this world. so the more people there are who 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' the better the world we will have around us.

where evil emerges is when people get into positions of power and think they are beyond reproach - that there will be no consequences for them in screwing others over. hence the saying 'absolute power corrupts absolutely'. in essence, they are able to take advantage of others precisely because others are being 'good' (and hence good has almost become a weakness in some people's eyes).

hence we end with modern thinking that being 'good' is almost hte same as being 'gullible' or 'naive'.

but its not. its those who take advantage of 'good' people who are being 'naive' and if you will 'evil'. because if everyone were to act as they did the world would be a 100 times more of a mess than it is right now.

key to 'evil' if you will is that it must hide itself from 'good'. it must pretend that its not evil and do its work in the shadows. because when evil becomes evident, people will rise up against it at some point.

throughout mankinds history we do not find 'evil' men worshipped by the masses. in fact the opposite, we hold those who fought for good as our hereos - gandhi, JFK, etc.

the human spirit's natural inclination is towards good. but our minds are suceptible to getting confused, influenced, self centered and corrupted by power and as such many people go astray.

all i can say is that i've yet to see a corrupt 'evil' person who was 'happy'. moreover, i've yet to see one whose life i would want to live.

 

[Quiksilver]

I don't understand what compels people to do this. If I have extra cash, I'd spend it on my family or save it or invest it. Selfish? No, just human nature. It is unnatural for one who help someone who is not of their own kin. Kinship is a basic biological instinct seen in many animals. Helping one's brother is about 2x more frequent than helping ones cousin, which is about 2x more frequent then helping ones second cousin. Someone with totally no relation to you should, biologically speaking, recieve no aid whatsoever because you are in effect taking away from your own resources.

Again I don't understand why you did this. Sounds like BS to me...could be...could be you really do it, but your true reason...what is it? Why be so hesitant to buy a woman a drink, when you are so eager to buy this man a coffee? Why not just give him 20 dollars next time and leave him alone for 1 week and tell him to use it to buy his own coffee? Do you truly believe in doing good and inherent goodness? Give him a 20 dollar bill next time and tell him to buy coffee for the next week adn you'lll be back to give him more money. Fvck these people man. They don't know you from the other poor sucker who gave the money. Ungrateful, and unworthy of aid.

If everyone had this attitude, we'd still be living in caves drawing stick people on the wall.

 

[STR8UP]

good also stems from what is ultimately in our best interest.

Yes, it does. Truly successful people realize that in order to elevate themselves, they must elevate others. The sum is greater than its parts in a COOPERATIVE EFFORT. However, and this is a BIG however, MOST PEOPLE DO NOT REALIZE THIS. Instead of saying "How can I help myself by helping other people who have the potential to help me?", they say "Screw everyone else. I'm out to get MINE".

And I mentioned it before in this thread, but knowing this usually comes from having the proper perspective. The average Joe (no pun intended) goes through life fitting into a slot in society and does not get a real glimpse behind the scenes. Ask anyone who has dealt with employees, tenants, business partners, or anything that has to do with money on a larger scale than the couple of hundred bucks a person might have in his wallet at any given time, and I would bet that the overwhelming majority of these people would very much disagree with you on the "people are good" point.

the human spirit's natural inclination is towards good. but our minds are suceptible to getting confused, influenced, self centered and corrupted by power and as such many people go astray.

First of all, the idea that "power" is the only thing responsible for evil is ridiculous. Some of the most evil people ever to have walked the earth have had no power. Classic matrix default thinking to blame the person "above" you.

Second of all, we've been through this before. It is NOT possible for people's natural inclination to be "good", because if everyone were skipping down the block handing out "love" to anyone and everyone, there would be no human race in a few hundred years.

Why do you think communism does not work? It's a great idea in theory, but it goes against human nature.

Here's an interesting fact for ya. Did you know that in the former Soviet Union people were NOT paid based upon ability, merit, education, etc.? They were paid based upon the opportunity the position afforded them to steal or bribe money.

People are good....yeaaaaa

 

[Luthor Rex]

So is this nutjob saying that he is above human intelligence? What follows after the giant letters I blew up is basically him "rising above" human intelligence since he's describing him and all trying to be artsy fartsy

It read to me like that post said:

"Humans cannot describe god... now I shall describe god."

You'll see a lot of that kind of stuff if you read about arguments for god.

:flowers:

 

[Luthor Rex]

(and hence good has almost become a weakness in some people's eyes).

hence we end with modern thinking that being 'good' is almost hte same as being 'gullible' or 'naive'.

but its not. its those who take advantage of 'good' people who are being 'naive' and if you will 'evil'. because if everyone were to act as they did the world would be a 100 times more of a mess than it is right now.

I don't know if the following story is true, but it sounds like it could be. It's a good example of why 'evil' destroys itself. Too bad others get taken with it when they don't realize they are dealing with an evil person.

http://awomanagainstfeminism.blogspot.com/2007/12/middle-aged-princess-grows-up.html

On the cusp of my 45th birthday, I made the mistake of looking in the mirror. It wasn’t the bathroom mirror, it was a photo I had from graduate school. I looked at myself 20 years ago and had a startling and clear epiphany. It wasn’t a happy moment. It was a terribly sad moment. It was so sad that I involuntarily burst into tears, something I haven’t done since the dark days of my divorce.

I looked at the photo and came to the conclusion that I had made a real mess of my life. I felt the utter misery of my life come in waves of sadness, regret, anger, and loneliness. For almost an hour I cried as I looked at the photo of a younger me. I was 24 with a fresh MBA from an excellent school. I was eager to conquer the business world. I was eager to prove that women could do anything. I was so much thinner. My clothes looked stylish, almost sexy. Of course the hair style was awful but that was the 80s and such styles could be forgiven. I saw the brightness in my eyes, the sparkle of life, of the great opportunities that were open to me. The world was there for my taking and I was ready.

But somehow, some way, it never came to be. My life evolved into something painful and difficult. But until that moment when I looked at my photo from over two decades ago, I always blamed someone else. It was never my fault for the bad decisions I made. Typically, it was the fault of men - my father, my boyfriends, my husband, my boss, my sons. Never, ever was it something that I had done.

 

[aliasguy]

Eco's character speaking in this quote was a woman talking to Baudolino. and her "descriptions" of "god" are all internally contradictory, displaying the futility of intellectual exercises in the attempt to "prove" anything about god: his existence or nonexistence, or any aspect of his "characteristics" (if in fact he does exist.)

This was a quote from a novel, and the character speaking does not necessarily reflect Eco's own theology.

I simply found it to be an effective way to illustrate my personal view that god is not a person like us, a "man in the sky," who we can relate to. That's all.

I reject the concept of a "personal god," and I think Eco does, too, but I'm not sure. I like the quote, though.

Sorry you guys think it's too artsy-fartsy.

 

[joekerr31]

luthor, good example.

i personallly believe the only thing you die with (or without) is your self respect.

and i'll say this, the nicer person you are in life, the more self respect you'll have.