43 ms·

Are you nice or kind?

255 points by _gfwu 5y ago

possiblydrunk 5y ago
Kindness can be nice, and niceness can be kind.
hprotagonist 5y ago
> I think the same could be said for the commercialized version of anti-racism that’s been embraced by brands both personal and corporate. The kind that emphasizes microaggressions and representation over social and economic emergencies. Politically speaking, niceness is good, but kindness is urgent. Clapping for essential workers is nice, paying them a liveable wage is urgent. Using the right pronouns is nice; ensuring rights, safety, and protection for trans people is urgent. “Nothing happens after the pronoun check-ins and the icebreakers,” Green, who is Black and non-binary, wrote. “It's rare we make sure that people's immediate needs are addressed.” 23 ‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. It is these you ought to have practised without neglecting the others. 24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel! 29 ‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous, 30 and you say, “If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.” 31 Thus you testify against yourselves that you are descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Fill up, then, the measure of your ancestors.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- adamrezich 5y ago
  my thoughts exactly. one of the biggest problems in contemporary times is politicians who pat themselves on the back (and encourage everyone who voted for them or who supports their party to also pat them and themselves on the back) for accomplishing something politically that Sounds Nice And Good On Paper but in reality doesn't change anything about anyone's situation. this problem long predated social media of course but it's pretty obvious that social media has only exacerbated things, because advocating for something that Sounds Nice And Good On Paper gets lots of user engagement (likes, retweets), which only goes to further the illusion that it's any sort of solution to any sort of problem. why spend lots and lots of money to actually attempt to fix institutional, structural, or otherwise endemic issues for any group of people, when hollow PR-friendly gestures get you reelected just as easily? in fact, it's even better to do make hollow, PR-friendly, Sounds Nice And Good On Paper-type gestures than to actually do anything, because in the process of promoting such maneuvers, you get to convince everyone "on your side" that you're doing something Necessary, Right, and Just, but, more importantly, anyone who disagrees with the empty gesture or calls you out for making hollow PR-friendly gestures to begin with can be easily dismissed as some kind of -ist Political Adversary! then you get to posture yourself against them and their -ism which leads to further back-patting (or, if you prefer, circlejerking). it's hard to see a way out of this mess—where would one even begin to try to change this metastructure that prevents the change of further structures by incentivizing ineffectual bullshit gestures over Actual, Measurable Change That Improves Peoples' Lives?
  - hprotagonist 5y ago
    > it's hard to see a way out of this mess—where would one even begin to try to change this metastructure that prevents the change of further structures by incentivizing ineffectual bullshit gestures over Actual, Measurable Change That Improves Peoples' Lives? One person at a time, without making a big fuss about it, realizes that to be first you must be last, and gets the work done and learns to ignore the bullshit. It’s not glamorous, it’s likely to be ignored completely by the powers and the principalities, and it’s one of the few things on this earth that keeps you human because it keeps you in relationship and community with other real life complicated people.
emerged 5y ago
In addition to the Nice vs Kind distinction, there is the sort which is “Nice” or “Kind” to one person/people with the tactic of explicitly being “Mean” or “Evil” to someone else. Most of popular identity politics is either “Nice and Mean” (X identity is great, Y people are bad) or “Kind and Evil” (there’s institutionalized whatever, so let’s help X by punishing Y). Meanwhile the actual good people in the world are Kind and Kind to everyone.
- monktastic1 5y ago
  Indeed. I would go so far as to say that it's only true kindness when it's kind to everyone. (I wrote a top-level comment here with a link to a piece I recently wrote about this.)
- moate 5y ago
  So following the original Author's Nice (optics over results) vs Kind (results over optics) IDK how Mean (optics over results) vs Evil (results over optics) actually works. I don't believe many (any?) people think they're doing Evil with the goal of harming others as the ends. It seems most likely that people think they're doing something for a greater good, but that requires sacrifices (e.g. "Yes, we have to murder/imprison all the Jews/Asians/Gays/Whatever, but that's because they're ruining our country"). And I don't know how many people are trying to be be Mean but not doing a small Evil. What does a Mean act that doesn't harm the other person look like? Also as someone who regularly engages in identity politics, I think your last point is just a "No True Scotsman" but also sort of proves my earlier point: being kind is doing good without regard for the optics, and everyone thinks that's what they are in their head.
  - codetrotter 5y ago
    > What does a Mean act that doesn't harm the other person look like? Cutting in line, is one example that comes to mind. Certainly a mean thing to do, and a dick move, but not really harmful in the grand scheme of things.
    - moate 5y ago
reggieband 5y ago
> Stand at a flight of stairs in the NYC subway with a stroller. Someone will grab the other end, help you carry the stroller, and then walk away without saying a word. This is one of my enduring memories of NYC as I saw this precisely play out first hand. A tiny woman with a massive stroller arrived at the base of the stairs and the guy walking in front of her glanced back then gave the slightest nod before reaching down and grabbing the front axle. She overhead pressed the stroller handles, they climbed a couple of flights and at the top of the stairs he put his end down. Not a word exchanged, not even a thanks, they just went their separate ways. It was so smooth, almost choreographed, I don't believe the woman even broke stride.
- prmph 5y ago
  Wow, something very similar happened to me when I first came to America to study from Ghana and landed in NYC. Struggling with my luggage up a flight of stairs from the subway station, a young lady grabbed the other end of my heaviest bag, helped me up with it, and left without saying a word. Cool to hear this is not uncommon. This incident is indeed also one of my most enduring memories of NYC.
- technothrasher 5y ago
  When I was in Amsterdam a couple years back, walking up a hilly street, I saw a lady with a stroller hanging out with her friends and chatting away while the stroller with baby inside started to roll down the hill towards me. I grabbed the stroller and rolled it back up to her about six feet or so. She looked at me, looked at the stroller, then laughed briefly and went back to talking to her friends. I just kept walking and thought, “that was one of the strangest short interactions I’ve ever had with somebody.” I put it down to something culturally Dutch that I didn’t understand.
  - vinni2 5y ago
    “ walking up a hilly street” in Amsterdam how funny
    - technothrasher 5y ago
cxr 5y ago
> kindness may be ‘Ugh, you've said that five times, here's a sweater!’ The turn of phrase I've used in my internal monologue is "harshly compassionate". The example given frames this in terms of assistance, but it goes beyond that. Pearl Jam's song Given To Fly really exemplifies this sort of thing. In the middle of mythologizing and uplifting messaging of love, the word "fuckers" gets dropped in. Similar but not the same: Brooke Allen's contrast of "good" people versus "nice" people <https://brookeallen.com/2015/01/14/how-to-hire-good-people-instead-of-nice-people/ https://brookeallen.com/2015/01/14/how-to-hire-good-people-i...>
monktastic1 5y ago
I love that people are beginning to make this distinction. I wrote a take on it recently that I might as well share here. Trigger warning for people who don't like mystical language! https://hackmd.io/@monktastic/Its-all-you https://hackmd.io/@monktastic/Its-all-you
- JetAlone 5y ago
  Does mystical language honestly require a trigger warning? https://psychlopaedia.org/society/republished/whats-the-difference-between-traumatic-fear-and-moral-anger-trigger-warnings-wont-tell-you/ https://psychlopaedia.org/society/republished/whats-the-diff... """ The idea of trigger warnings originates in the psychiatric literature on post-traumatic reactions, where triggering had the same connotations. The primary features of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) include so-called “re-experiencing symptoms”, like intrusive thoughts and flashbacks. These thoughts and images bring traumatic events vividly back to life, accompanied by the intense fear that the events originally evoked. Experiences that recall those early events trigger re-experiencing symptoms through a process that is rapid, unconscious, involuntary and automatic. That process is often understood in terms of fear conditioning. """ The only person who I know of who has a form of PTSD that could be triggered by reading a mystical take would be Dawn Lawton, writer of "When Buddhism goes bad", or someone who went through a similarly distressing situation. https://danlawton.substack.com/p/when-buddhism-goes-bad/comments?s=r https://danlawton.substack.com/p/when-buddhism-goes-bad/comm... Is a situation like this common enough to warrant it? While there are some posters on HN who are into buddhism/meditation or have tried it, I think this sort of experience is still not so common in this space and the TW threatens to cheapen the meaning of a trigger, normalizes pathological sensitivity and adds artificial social barriers to interesting discussions. Well, that's just what I think. But if what you say is true, it would also be what you think, as me.
  - nobody9999 5y ago
    >Does mystical language honestly require a trigger warning? I think GP was being a little flip with that, especially since many on HN are likely (as I am) empricists who don't really go in for "mystical language" or what is generally known as "woo."[0] Hence the facetious reference to a "trigger warning." Perhaps GP could confirm or reject my hypothesis? [0] http://skepdic.com/woowoo.html http://skepdic.com/woowoo.html Edit: Found the missing link.
trackofalljades 5y ago
While the word choice feels awkward, what the author is trying to say about generalized east coast culture versus generalized west coast culture is SPOT ON. I've lived in five states, on an island, and outside the USA as well, and I would absolutely use these kinds of examples to differentiate NYC from LA, or Philly from Seattle, etc. Most of the mid-west and southern Ontario fall into this "east coast" cultural norm as well (even more extremely on the kindness side).
- palijer 5y ago
  I live in Toronto and can confirm. People will say Torontonians are mean and aren't as friendly as the rest of Ontario/Canada, but when it snows you'll be hard pressed to find any able-bodied person not helping out random stuck cars they pass while walking. Much like the article says, you'll basically just get a wave or a shake of the head after the deed is done. Plus I can't count the times I've seen folks looking confused at a transit stop and someone asks them if they need help before I get to them. Of course, the local will act annoyed the entire time while helping.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    After a major snowstorm (not in Toronto), I encountered an elderly person trying to dig out their car. I took their shovel, with little interaction as is described, and dug them out. It was some work. I also shoveled the curb to the sidewalk and around to the driver side, so they wouldn't slip. I handed the shovel back, and started leaving and noticed that they were headed into their home, not to their car. I inquired, and they weren't going anywhere. Maybe a bit more interaction beforehand would have helped.
  - Mumps 5y ago
    I think the difference of Toronto (versus much the rest of Canada) is not about helping dig/push cars slid down into the rhubarb, or high-centered on a snowbank - most all of Canadians likely would. But in Calgary, Manitoba, Waterloo... I've done and seen people at this while also having a nice conversation.
- bee_rider 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
nonrandomstring 5y ago
Pure Kant. Life affirming wherever you see it. People doing something right because it's the right thing to do. Never in anticipation of reward or even acknowledgement. Never because someone might see you (virtue signalling) Nor because it makes you feel good inside. (vanity) Not even if God had commanded you. (must come from free will)
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  Kant's categorical imperative is a circlular argument from religion - bad things are bad because they're bad, good things are good because they're good. He advocated for telling a murderer where their intended victim is, because lying is categorically wrong [1]. Deontology can only be justified by religion; utilitarianism (ethics come from the outcome) is the better option. Also Kant positioning himself as a moral philosopher is pretty ironic because he was insanely racist. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative > One of the first major challenges to Kant's reasoning came from the French philosopher Benjamin Constant, who asserted that since truth telling must be universal, according to Kant's theories, one must (if asked) tell a known murderer the location of his prey. This challenge occurred while Kant was still alive, and his response was the essay On a Supposed Right to Tell Lies from Benevolent Motives (sometimes translated On a Supposed Right to Lie because of Philanthropic Concerns). In this reply, Kant agreed with Constant's inference, that from Kant's own premises one must infer a moral duty not to lie to a murderer.
  - marginalia_nu 5y ago
    > utilitarianism (ethics come from the outcome) is the better option Utilitarianism is just as subject to countering every argument for it with "yeah, but why?" It boils down to the is-ought problem. If you remove the objective will of god, what is left is the subjective will of individual human beings. I struggle to see how utilitarianism would follow from the latter. > Also Kant positioning himself as a moral philosopher is pretty ironic because he was insanely racist. What in the world does that have to do with being a moral philosopher?
deanCommie 5y ago
A challenge I have with this framing is it suggests a binary when none is necessary. The premise is New Yorkers are Kind but not Nice, and that's good. Well, in the context of helping a woman with a stroller vs not, obviously helping is better, even if you don't say thanks or say anything nice at the same time. But also, why not both? It's not like you can't help with the stroller, AND shout a friendly "Have a nice day" as you leave. It costs nothing extra. It's okay that New Yorkers are NOT like that - it's totally fine. The job got done. But it's not binary. So the implication is that the alternative is to say "Wow it looks like you are really struggling with that stroller, that must be so tough", and to offer no help in response. But, I don't think this person exists. Maybe it's true that people on the West coast won't help with the stroller, but they're NOT going to stop and empathize and do something nice while they do it. The people not helping on the subway on the West coast are NEITHER Nice nor Kind, maybe because of geography, maybe because the individualism of car-orientated culture makes people forget they live in a community the way people in New York are incapable of forgetting. I propose that that "Nice but not Kind" caricature is actually incredibly rare to the point of non-existence. It tends to be used by the right to describe the entire left - as virtue signaling, caring-about-optics, overly politically-correct, social justice warriors. But the people who are using these characterizations are not themselves fighting for meaningful change. They're using this exclusively to criticize caring or small incremental progress forward. Yes, legal protection for trans people is more important than using correct pronouns. But who out there is preaching proper pronoun usage WITHOUT supporting legislation for protection of trans people? Tell me which politicians support these protections, and I'll vote for them, but day-to-day I cant change the law. I CAN change what pronouns I use with my friends and strangers. So do I spend most of my time being "nice but not kind" because I only vote one day out of 365 for politicians that do Kind acts? Even the "liberal vs leftist" comparison is a bit strange because it's entirely US-centric and is part of the way that Americans fool themselves that the Democratic party is in any way progressive. They are centrist by any political spectrum definition, and as such share some of the same "conservative" attitudes to certain types of social progress as their Republican counterparts. So yes, Be kind. If you can only be one, Be kind. But 99% of situations it costs nothing extra to Kind AND Nice. And The situations where one can ONLY be Nice but not Kind are few and far between, and tend to be exaggerated.
- 5y ago
betwixthewires 5y ago
I think the distinction between niceness and kindness is very accurate, but applied to liberals vs leftists I think is a stretch.
WalterBright 5y ago
virtue: volunteering at a soup kitchen virtue signalling: inviting the press to photograph you volunteering at a soup kitchen virtue: donating anonymously to your favorite cause virtue signalling: demanding the government fund your favorite cause
- orwin 5y ago
  > virtue: donating anonymously to your favorite cause > virtue signalling: demanding the government fund your favorite cause I thought that as we built and testes political systems, we decided that collegial decisions on fund attribution and nation goal were the best way of doing thing. I actually think lobbying and militant advocacy are the correct way of acting and spending money. If you aren't able to convince people, maybe your idea is not as good as you thought.
  - LesZedCB 5y ago
    except that money isn't distributed democratically....... maybe if the government gave everybody a 'democracy fund' of $1000 to be distributed to whatever registered recipients/distributions. no more, no less spending on lobbying.
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    I fail to see the virtue in forcibly spending someone else's money on your favorite cause, even if it is a good cause. A litmus test as to whether you really believe it is a good cause is if you're willing to spend your own money on it. And not a token amount, either. Real money.
    - lamontcg 5y ago
      I could send my whole life savings / net worth off to some organization that is addressing climate change and it won't make a drop in the bucket and nothing will change.
      - WalterBright 5y ago
twayt 5y ago
Although kindness is seen as a virtue and niceness a sin in many arenas in life, in some business settings being superficially nice and ruthless is seen as a virtue. I wonder if there is more accessible content discussing how to deal with such people and situations
junon 5y ago
> Kindness is addressing the need, regardless of tone. I've yet to see this put as succinctly as this.
silvestrov 5y ago
I've heard the variation: In LA they say "good morning" and mean "fuck you". In NY they say "fuck you" and mean "good morning".
- ericbarrett 5y ago
  I've lived in both cities. The LA bit is true. In New York, "fuck you" means "fuck you" and they don't bother with "good morning."
  - willcipriano 5y ago
    In Philly someone can call you an asshole (usually worse) and it it can put a smile on your face. Brotherly love man, it's one of the few places I feel like I can be myself.
    - trelane 5y ago
      That definitely sounds like brothers, in my experience. :)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
crooked-v 5y ago
I'm reminded of the musical Into the Woods, which makes this kind of distinction one of its central themes, as particularly embodied by the witch ("I'm not nice, I'm not good, I'm just right"). One of the songs is focused on her confrontation with the musical's set of other fairy-tale characters about how they care more about being "nice" (that is, saving face and not feeling morally culpable about anything) than about either being "good" (taking morally correct actions and accepting personal suffering in the process) or being "right" (fixing the kingdom's major ongoing crisis, whatever the cost).
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > "right" (fixing the kingdom's major ongoing crisis, whatever the cost) How is that right, if you ignore the costs (such as evil)? What the heck does "right" mean?
  - crooked-v 4y ago
    Well, that's a good question, isn't it? None of the characters, including the witch, are without their flaws and problems in their worldview. You might be interested in watching the musical to find out more.
    - wolverine876 4y ago
      I've seen it. Sondheim is brilliant but the musical's extreme relativism, as I understand it - anything is ok as long as you accept the consequences - lost me and didn't seem to have a basis in the story.
quickthrower2 5y ago
This is wonderfully articulate and motivates me at least to aim for a more stoic approach to life. Makes me wonder what I can do to help the world as mostly I don’t do much at all for wider society. At least I don’t tweet nice stuff to compensate! Also as an introvert, helping with a pram on a subway without small talk sounds pretty cool. Shame I don’t live in NYC or similar!
deeg 5y ago
I'd add one more differentiation. "Nice" doesn't require much effort but "kind" does. Being kind might require some sacrifice. Maybe it's voting against the zoning law that will increase your property value.
civilized 5y ago
"Kindness" is one of those words that we've all recently agreed is an Absolute Anchor of Goodness. It's in everyone's mouth and on all the yard signs. But since no one agrees on what Goodness is, we don't agree on what Kindness is either. The "nice vs. kind" distinction is one of the ways we (indirectly) challenge that Absolute. We all agree that the bundle of traits associated with Kindness - being positive, agreeable, caring, and giving - are basically good, but the Devil's always in the details. I think that what a lot of people call Kindness, I call Ruinous Empathy [1] or avoidance. This sort of "kindness" either fails to communicate challenging information, or it bends over backwards to sugarcoat it so much that the message gets lost... which amounts to the same thing. [1] https://www.radicalcandor.com/faq/what-is-ruinous-empathy/ https://www.radicalcandor.com/faq/what-is-ruinous-empathy/
omalleyt 5y ago
Nice is about mannerisms, kind is about actions.
hahaxdxd123 5y ago
Interesting that I can so easily argue the reverse in terms of her political alignments: Leftists: you should be able to have xyz. Oh, no, I don't have a feasible plan to implement it but I'm definitely saying you should have it. (nice) Liberals: here's a massive reduction in child poverty through the expanded EITC (kind) I definitely agree with the geographical divide though, wherein the SF "progressives" are very nice and will put out the "BLM, No one is illegal, etc" sign in the garden but balk at being kind enough to actually build homes to allow those people to live near them. edit: thanks for the downvotes with no constructive criticism, very kind of you!
- steveBK123 5y ago
  Right you have some of this strain of thought in the more extreme environmental class. Get rid of nuclear plants. Block new solar because it replaces some pretty land. Argue about view obstruction by wind power. Net effect is more natgas power.. and probably in the poorer neighborhoods they ostensibly care about with all their "climate inequality" activism, etc.
- hayd 5y ago
  I read those BLM signs on people's multi-million dollar houses in SF as "please don't burglarize me".
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
elevenoh 5y ago
Wokism at its essence is Nice > Kind. And nice is near-meaningless.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  Quite the opposite: It's Good >> Nice/Kind. It's saying things that are very unpopular, pointing out realities that people are uncomfortable with, because it's good and necessary, regardless of the very un-nice, unkind responses you get. The idea is that we cannot fail to talk about and address these things anymore, just because some people are uncomfortable and it's challenging social norms to say them.
  - asiachick 5y ago
    No, because it's doesn't work. So the fact that it's ineffective as well as quite often hypocritical means it's optics > results. If you want results, doing the "woke" thing won't get you any.
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      > it's doesn't work I think the evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary. Much has changed in the world. For example, looking at some recent issues: Major cities are handling policing much differently; discrimination against women is now toxic to careers; the US Congress has now made lynching a crime and is removing Confederate names from the military. District attorneys in cities have been transformed. Major news media now reports differetly on race than just a few years ago. It's common rhetoric, going way back, to dismiss progressives as powerless, but what people see today as the norm or conservative is what progressives achieved in prior generations. If you're a 'chick' (based on your username), you don't have to live with a male family member and get their permission for everything, can get a full education, be financially independent, can have intimate relations and dress (mostly) how you please without being ostracized, can have careers beyond nursing and teaching, etc. When people woke up and made those changes, years ago, they got the same response as today. But why is it so urgent to shut them down? What is so threatening? What a waste of time - time would be much better spent achieving something ourselves. So much needs to be done.
madrox 5y ago
Applying this to engineering orgs, one of my hiring principles has been “hire kind people.” My thought was that you can teach people lots of things, but you can’t teach people to be kind. I’m probably wrong on that, but it’s seemed true in the context of building teams. You can more easily teach niceness than kindness, anyway. The older I get, the more niceness drives me nuts when not also backed with kindness. If I have to choose who I’d rather work with, I’d rather work with kind people who aren’t nice. They’re not always easy to work with, but I can count on them to work with people instead of complain about them behind their back. This is, of course, not a dichotomy. There are plenty of people who lack both qualities. Those brilliant jerks I am totally fine never hiring again.
- Breza 4y ago
  The best coworker I've ever had was a CTO who was well known for being grumpy. He leaned into it, with a Darth Vader head on his desk, an internal email signature identifying him as "CTO, Grumpiness," etc. When I actually started working with him on projects, I realized he was unbelievably kind. He taught me most of what I know about software project management and designing architectures. Over the course of a few years, I spent dozens of hours in his office with him going over problems and possible solutions on his whiteboard and making sure I understood, followed by me watching him code a quick proof of concept.
- Tarq0n 5y ago
  I totally agree that kindness is a trait I love having in teammates, but how do you screen for that in interviews?
  - spacemanmatt 5y ago
    Voight-Kampff test is traditional
  - madrox 4y ago
    A really great question. In my experience, there is no single set of interview questions that get at that trait. However, you gain some sense of their capacity for kindness in how they answer interpersonal questions, conflict resolution, and how they think about working with teams. Also, in my experience kind people tend to recognize other kind people. I often think this is what "culture fit" x-factors end up amounting to.
sebastianconcpt 5y ago
TL;DR: Not everyone will see leftist politics this way, but I’ve found it grounding and humbling. It’s also easier to track progress
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dang 5y ago
https://microblogrf.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/the-difference-between-la-and-ny-by-the-late/ https://microblogrf.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/the-difference-...
maps7 5y ago
What an uninteresting (set) of posts on HN's frontpage.. I see the irony of my uninteresting comment too! This is just not the content I come to HN for at all.
SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
> He offered no hello, merely stormed into the situation and barked orders at us—drive forward! now rock back! now turn your wheel all the way to the right!—until our car miraculously lurched forward, at which point he hurried unceremoniously back to his car and drove off. I am absolutely certain I have been on the other side of this as the person helping someone completely clueless how to rock a car out of being stuck. That the author calls it “miraculous” still even after retrospect is amusing.
calebm 5y ago
nice = good behavior from external pressure, kind = good behavior from internal desire
JetAlone 5y ago
Am I nice or kind? I'm glad it's not nice xor kind, because I don't think the two have to be mutually exclusive. We're like different people in different contexts, too, psychologically speaking. Maybe I'm nice nand kind right now.
ep103 5y ago
I think the idea here is important, but the word choice could be better clarified. What she is describing is the difference between being polite, and being good. Knowing how to be polite is an important skill for social decorum and practicing empathy. But politeness is performative, it is "skin-deep"; and is very easily and frequently used to both hide and mask a conscious choice to _not_ do good. For example, instead of helping you dig out your car, I could instead, politely, express empathy with your situation. Since our society holds politeness as a virtue, I can now feel good (and be socially rewarded for) having done a slightly good thing. The reality may be, however, that what I have actually done is selfishly excused myself from actually having helped you. Bad actors exploit this phenomenon. And this is widely understood. This is where "Thoughts and Prayers" comes from. This is why a Southerner saying "Bless Your Heart" is understood to be an insult (it translates, roughly to: 'you just said something stupid, so rather than engage with you, I'm going to use politeness to allow me to ignore you / your statement'). This is a large part of what Bo Burnham's recent hit "That Funny Feeling" was about. etc. In my personal life, I have generally found people who exploit this phenomenon to be among the worst people I have to deal with, as people who are bad actors but lack the ability to be polite get filtered out pretty quickly, while these such people can persist and deal damage for quite some time. I will take an impolite good person over a polite bad actor any day of the week. Though, of course, too many people without an understanding of how to be properly polite in close context is its own recipe for problems.
- blaser-waffle 4y ago
  The Russians have 3 words for truth, like small lies for the sake of getting out of awkward situations, big lies for strategic reasons, and the absolute, real, actual truth. A lot of those "bless your hearts" & "thoughts and prayers" read the same, except we don't have a formal, explicit concept in English of such things.
- qubitcoder 4y ago
  Very well said. Just a small addendum. As someone who grew up in the south, I'd just like to mention that "Bless Your Heart" could be used in a derogatory manner. But, most often, it's used to express genuine concern for someone going through a tough time. So, don't automatically assume it's an insult :-).
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
I just want to thank whoever posted these articles (both this one and the "Are you a baby?" one) to HN. I think this author is fantastic, and she's stated clearly, but with very evocative writing, some general feelings I've had about the state of society for the past couple years but could never have put into words as well as she has. For one, I consider myself to be someone generally "on the left" politically, but I've felt so nauseated by what I see as the worst performative debates of the leftish mobs ("master to main" anyone), because I feel they share the exact same nauseating tactics of the far (and not-so-far) right: professional victimhood. On the right, the media is "so unfair" and there is a "war against Christmas", while on the left nothing is ever anyone's fault if they weren't the benefit of "privilege" in their life. What I like about this author is she acknowledges the kernels of truth on both sides, but clearly advocates that actual, honest, non-avoidant action is what is so often missing.
- Traubenfuchs 5y ago
  > someone generally "on the left" politically It's time to abandon this harmful single axis thinking. It leads to "generally left" people being afraid of having "right wing views" and the other way round, creating cognitive dissonance and other bad mental states and mental mono cultures among "the left" and "the right".
  - spacemanmatt 4y ago
    I think it's a bit outdated so see identification with "the left" as a single axis. Most of us arrive at such conclusions by concurrence on many axes. I disagree with the analysis about mental mono cultures being created by labels. The dichotomy in views exists whether we use concise language or not.
    - Traubenfuchs 4y ago
      But left and right are two directions on a single axis per definition. I am homosexual and for LGB rights, but feel mostly disdain for Q and especially T and the other made up letters. I support a strong social security system, free health care, livable pensions etc. and I believe the rich should be taxed more, minimum wages should be increased significantly. I am for a very selective immigration and asylum system based on merit of the immigrant for the country (Australia/Canada). "#MY_COUNTRY first!" deeply resonated with my soul, every politician should live that. Am I left? Am I right? I feel like those labels absolutely do not apply to me. When I talk about the "mono culture", what I mean is, for example most of my homosexual peers seem to feel subconsciously forced to support opinions of parties that traditionally support them that are actively harmful to them, e.g. letting Muslim immigrants into the country.
elvis10ten 5y ago
I choose to try to be both, as there is no law of nature that says you have to be nice or kind.
coding123 5y ago
really, liberals vs leftists? People on the east are just 10 to 15 years from living in Florida as right side as you get. I do think the right is MORE KIND in general.
newyankee 5y ago
I could make an argument that most of the Western world or White guilt translates IRL to being NICE to third world countries when in fact what is needed is being KIND.
iovrthoughtthis 5y ago
we're trying to draw really well defined lines between very fuzzy concepts interested to see when the pendulum swings back on this
rendall 5y ago
One of my favorite memories of NYC. I was late catching my train at Penn Station. I was only two or three long blocks away, but dragging a heavy suitcase, and my timely arrival was uncertain. Traffic was decent and a taxi was right nearby, so I hailed, got in, and explained the situation. "I'll get you there", the driver said. Then to my dismay, I realized I only had $2 cash in my wallet. "Shit. Let me out. I only have $2. I'm so sorry." He looked back at me and said solemnly, "You're late, you're broke, and you're not that good looking." Then he turned off his meter, took what money I had, and drove me the rest of the way. I made my train with time to spare, thanks to him.
_qua 5y ago
Come to Chicago where people are both nice and kind
michaelsbradley 5y ago
In my experience, "nice" is toward one end of a spectrum of social-interaction behaviors while "gruff" is toward the other end of that spectrum. Kindness, though, is measured in deeds. The kindest person I've ever encountered was also the gruffest. I'll call him Brother John. I lived in close quarters with him for not quite a year along with a dozen other persons: shared small quarters (lots of bunk beds), meals, chores, recreation, etc. Outside of our living situation the work was back-breaking 24/7/365: running an orphanage plus a home for the infirm. Altogether the ratio was, on average, about 15:1 (residents to care workers). The context was Cap-Haïtien in the early 2000s. There was no backstop, someone needed something you did it for them: sad, you hugged them; hungry, you fed them; poopy, you cleaned them (again); dead, you buried them; and so on. I didn't get along well with Brother John. For the first couple of months, I would smile and acquiesce. It didn't take me long to realize no one got along with him: not the folks within our little community, nor anyone in the surrounding neighborhood... maybe most everyone in the surrounding city had felt his porcupine quills when crossing paths with him? About 8 months in (my time there), Brother John was reassigned; he was sent to one of the community's apostolates in western Africa. His reassignment and departure happened abruptly. An eruption of grief ensued promptly. The thing is, despite his gruffness, Brother John was among the most caring/kindest persons you might ever meet. You needed something: diaper changed? itch scratched? big bag of rice for your family? firm slap in the face? ride to an hours-distant mission hospital? housing for your dead-relation's children? close to death and needed to cry and talk about your fears? He would size up your need and take care of it, or explain why it was beyond his reach (though he'd probably try regardless). And he'd somehow get it done before anyone else barely had time to blink. He'd been doing that for years. People didn't love Brother John and lament his loss after weighing his lack of nice-ness. They knew and experienced him for what he was: a kind man whose like is rare, someone you tell your kids and grandkids about, gruffness and all, with a hope they take it as a lesson about how to selflessly serve your neighbors.
cafard 4y ago
People would help you to dig out of snow in Denver, or give you a tug with a tow chain. In my first blizzard on the East Coast, I was astonished to see a guy offer to pull someone out of the snow for $10.

255 points by _gfwu 5y ago

Kindness can be nice, and niceness can be kind.

> I think the same could be said for the commercialized version of anti-racism that’s been embraced by brands both personal and corporate. The kind that emphasizes microaggressions and representation over social and economic emergencies. Politically speaking, niceness is good, but kindness is urgent. Clapping for essential workers is nice, paying them a liveable wage is urgent. Using the right pronouns is nice; ensuring rights, safety, and protection for trans people is urgent. “Nothing happens after the pronoun check-ins and the icebreakers,” Green, who is Black and non-binary, wrote. “It's rare we make sure that people's immediate needs are addressed.” 23 ‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. It is these you ought to have practised without neglecting the others. 24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel! 29 ‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous, 30 and you say, “If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.” 31 Thus you testify against yourselves that you are descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Fill up, then, the measure of your ancestors.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
adamrezich 5y ago
my thoughts exactly. one of the biggest problems in contemporary times is politicians who pat themselves on the back (and encourage everyone who voted for them or who supports their party to also pat them and themselves on the back) for accomplishing something politically that Sounds Nice And Good On Paper but in reality doesn't change anything about anyone's situation. this problem long predated social media of course but it's pretty obvious that social media has only exacerbated things, because advocating for something that Sounds Nice And Good On Paper gets lots of user engagement (likes, retweets), which only goes to further the illusion that it's any sort of solution to any sort of problem. why spend lots and lots of money to actually attempt to fix institutional, structural, or otherwise endemic issues for any group of people, when hollow PR-friendly gestures get you reelected just as easily? in fact, it's even better to do make hollow, PR-friendly, Sounds Nice And Good On Paper-type gestures than to actually do anything, because in the process of promoting such maneuvers, you get to convince everyone "on your side" that you're doing something Necessary, Right, and Just, but, more importantly, anyone who disagrees with the empty gesture or calls you out for making hollow PR-friendly gestures to begin with can be easily dismissed as some kind of -ist Political Adversary! then you get to posture yourself against them and their -ism which leads to further back-patting (or, if you prefer, circlejerking). it's hard to see a way out of this mess—where would one even begin to try to change this metastructure that prevents the change of further structures by incentivizing ineffectual bullshit gestures over Actual, Measurable Change That Improves Peoples' Lives?
- hprotagonist 5y ago
  > it's hard to see a way out of this mess—where would one even begin to try to change this metastructure that prevents the change of further structures by incentivizing ineffectual bullshit gestures over Actual, Measurable Change That Improves Peoples' Lives? One person at a time, without making a big fuss about it, realizes that to be first you must be last, and gets the work done and learns to ignore the bullshit. It’s not glamorous, it’s likely to be ignored completely by the powers and the principalities, and it’s one of the few things on this earth that keeps you human because it keeps you in relationship and community with other real life complicated people.

emerged 5y ago

In addition to the Nice vs Kind distinction, there is the sort which is “Nice” or “Kind” to one person/people with the tactic of explicitly being “Mean” or “Evil” to someone else. Most of popular identity politics is either “Nice and Mean” (X identity is great, Y people are bad) or “Kind and Evil” (there’s institutionalized whatever, so let’s help X by punishing Y). Meanwhile the actual good people in the world are Kind and Kind to everyone.

monktastic1 5y ago
Indeed. I would go so far as to say that it's only true kindness when it's kind to everyone. (I wrote a top-level comment here with a link to a piece I recently wrote about this.)
moate 5y ago
So following the original Author's Nice (optics over results) vs Kind (results over optics) IDK how Mean (optics over results) vs Evil (results over optics) actually works. I don't believe many (any?) people think they're doing Evil with the goal of harming others as the ends. It seems most likely that people think they're doing something for a greater good, but that requires sacrifices (e.g. "Yes, we have to murder/imprison all the Jews/Asians/Gays/Whatever, but that's because they're ruining our country"). And I don't know how many people are trying to be be Mean but not doing a small Evil. What does a Mean act that doesn't harm the other person look like? Also as someone who regularly engages in identity politics, I think your last point is just a "No True Scotsman" but also sort of proves my earlier point: being kind is doing good without regard for the optics, and everyone thinks that's what they are in their head.
- codetrotter 5y ago
  > What does a Mean act that doesn't harm the other person look like? Cutting in line, is one example that comes to mind. Certainly a mean thing to do, and a dick move, but not really harmful in the grand scheme of things.
  - moate 5y ago

reggieband 5y ago

> Stand at a flight of stairs in the NYC subway with a stroller. Someone will grab the other end, help you carry the stroller, and then walk away without saying a word. This is one of my enduring memories of NYC as I saw this precisely play out first hand. A tiny woman with a massive stroller arrived at the base of the stairs and the guy walking in front of her glanced back then gave the slightest nod before reaching down and grabbing the front axle. She overhead pressed the stroller handles, they climbed a couple of flights and at the top of the stairs he put his end down. Not a word exchanged, not even a thanks, they just went their separate ways. It was so smooth, almost choreographed, I don't believe the woman even broke stride.

prmph 5y ago
Wow, something very similar happened to me when I first came to America to study from Ghana and landed in NYC. Struggling with my luggage up a flight of stairs from the subway station, a young lady grabbed the other end of my heaviest bag, helped me up with it, and left without saying a word. Cool to hear this is not uncommon. This incident is indeed also one of my most enduring memories of NYC.
technothrasher 5y ago
When I was in Amsterdam a couple years back, walking up a hilly street, I saw a lady with a stroller hanging out with her friends and chatting away while the stroller with baby inside started to roll down the hill towards me. I grabbed the stroller and rolled it back up to her about six feet or so. She looked at me, looked at the stroller, then laughed briefly and went back to talking to her friends. I just kept walking and thought, “that was one of the strangest short interactions I’ve ever had with somebody.” I put it down to something culturally Dutch that I didn’t understand.
- vinni2 5y ago
  “ walking up a hilly street” in Amsterdam how funny
  - technothrasher 5y ago

cxr 5y ago

> kindness may be ‘Ugh, you've said that five times, here's a sweater!’ The turn of phrase I've used in my internal monologue is "harshly compassionate". The example given frames this in terms of assistance, but it goes beyond that. Pearl Jam's song Given To Fly really exemplifies this sort of thing. In the middle of mythologizing and uplifting messaging of love, the word "fuckers" gets dropped in. Similar but not the same: Brooke Allen's contrast of "good" people versus "nice" people <https://brookeallen.com/2015/01/14/how-to-hire-good-people-instead-of-nice-people/ https://brookeallen.com/2015/01/14/how-to-hire-good-people-i...>

monktastic1 5y ago

I love that people are beginning to make this distinction. I wrote a take on it recently that I might as well share here. Trigger warning for people who don't like mystical language! https://hackmd.io/@monktastic/Its-all-you https://hackmd.io/@monktastic/Its-all-you

JetAlone 5y ago
Does mystical language honestly require a trigger warning? https://psychlopaedia.org/society/republished/whats-the-difference-between-traumatic-fear-and-moral-anger-trigger-warnings-wont-tell-you/ https://psychlopaedia.org/society/republished/whats-the-diff... """ The idea of trigger warnings originates in the psychiatric literature on post-traumatic reactions, where triggering had the same connotations. The primary features of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) include so-called “re-experiencing symptoms”, like intrusive thoughts and flashbacks. These thoughts and images bring traumatic events vividly back to life, accompanied by the intense fear that the events originally evoked. Experiences that recall those early events trigger re-experiencing symptoms through a process that is rapid, unconscious, involuntary and automatic. That process is often understood in terms of fear conditioning. """ The only person who I know of who has a form of PTSD that could be triggered by reading a mystical take would be Dawn Lawton, writer of "When Buddhism goes bad", or someone who went through a similarly distressing situation. https://danlawton.substack.com/p/when-buddhism-goes-bad/comments?s=r https://danlawton.substack.com/p/when-buddhism-goes-bad/comm... Is a situation like this common enough to warrant it? While there are some posters on HN who are into buddhism/meditation or have tried it, I think this sort of experience is still not so common in this space and the TW threatens to cheapen the meaning of a trigger, normalizes pathological sensitivity and adds artificial social barriers to interesting discussions. Well, that's just what I think. But if what you say is true, it would also be what you think, as me.
- nobody9999 5y ago
  >Does mystical language honestly require a trigger warning? I think GP was being a little flip with that, especially since many on HN are likely (as I am) empricists who don't really go in for "mystical language" or what is generally known as "woo."[0] Hence the facetious reference to a "trigger warning." Perhaps GP could confirm or reject my hypothesis? [0] http://skepdic.com/woowoo.html http://skepdic.com/woowoo.html Edit: Found the missing link.

trackofalljades 5y ago

While the word choice feels awkward, what the author is trying to say about generalized east coast culture versus generalized west coast culture is SPOT ON. I've lived in five states, on an island, and outside the USA as well, and I would absolutely use these kinds of examples to differentiate NYC from LA, or Philly from Seattle, etc. Most of the mid-west and southern Ontario fall into this "east coast" cultural norm as well (even more extremely on the kindness side).

palijer 5y ago
I live in Toronto and can confirm. People will say Torontonians are mean and aren't as friendly as the rest of Ontario/Canada, but when it snows you'll be hard pressed to find any able-bodied person not helping out random stuck cars they pass while walking. Much like the article says, you'll basically just get a wave or a shake of the head after the deed is done. Plus I can't count the times I've seen folks looking confused at a transit stop and someone asks them if they need help before I get to them. Of course, the local will act annoyed the entire time while helping.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  After a major snowstorm (not in Toronto), I encountered an elderly person trying to dig out their car. I took their shovel, with little interaction as is described, and dug them out. It was some work. I also shoveled the curb to the sidewalk and around to the driver side, so they wouldn't slip. I handed the shovel back, and started leaving and noticed that they were headed into their home, not to their car. I inquired, and they weren't going anywhere. Maybe a bit more interaction beforehand would have helped.
- Mumps 5y ago
  I think the difference of Toronto (versus much the rest of Canada) is not about helping dig/push cars slid down into the rhubarb, or high-centered on a snowbank - most all of Canadians likely would. But in Calgary, Manitoba, Waterloo... I've done and seen people at this while also having a nice conversation.
bee_rider 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

nonrandomstring 5y ago

Pure Kant. Life affirming wherever you see it. People doing something right because it's the right thing to do. Never in anticipation of reward or even acknowledgement. Never because someone might see you (virtue signalling) Nor because it makes you feel good inside. (vanity) Not even if God had commanded you. (must come from free will)

beaconstudios 5y ago
Kant's categorical imperative is a circlular argument from religion - bad things are bad because they're bad, good things are good because they're good. He advocated for telling a murderer where their intended victim is, because lying is categorically wrong [1]. Deontology can only be justified by religion; utilitarianism (ethics come from the outcome) is the better option. Also Kant positioning himself as a moral philosopher is pretty ironic because he was insanely racist. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative > One of the first major challenges to Kant's reasoning came from the French philosopher Benjamin Constant, who asserted that since truth telling must be universal, according to Kant's theories, one must (if asked) tell a known murderer the location of his prey. This challenge occurred while Kant was still alive, and his response was the essay On a Supposed Right to Tell Lies from Benevolent Motives (sometimes translated On a Supposed Right to Lie because of Philanthropic Concerns). In this reply, Kant agreed with Constant's inference, that from Kant's own premises one must infer a moral duty not to lie to a murderer.
- marginalia_nu 5y ago
  > utilitarianism (ethics come from the outcome) is the better option Utilitarianism is just as subject to countering every argument for it with "yeah, but why?" It boils down to the is-ought problem. If you remove the objective will of god, what is left is the subjective will of individual human beings. I struggle to see how utilitarianism would follow from the latter. > Also Kant positioning himself as a moral philosopher is pretty ironic because he was insanely racist. What in the world does that have to do with being a moral philosopher?

deanCommie 5y ago

A challenge I have with this framing is it suggests a binary when none is necessary. The premise is New Yorkers are Kind but not Nice, and that's good. Well, in the context of helping a woman with a stroller vs not, obviously helping is better, even if you don't say thanks or say anything nice at the same time. But also, why not both? It's not like you can't help with the stroller, AND shout a friendly "Have a nice day" as you leave. It costs nothing extra. It's okay that New Yorkers are NOT like that - it's totally fine. The job got done. But it's not binary. So the implication is that the alternative is to say "Wow it looks like you are really struggling with that stroller, that must be so tough", and to offer no help in response. But, I don't think this person exists. Maybe it's true that people on the West coast won't help with the stroller, but they're NOT going to stop and empathize and do something nice while they do it. The people not helping on the subway on the West coast are NEITHER Nice nor Kind, maybe because of geography, maybe because the individualism of car-orientated culture makes people forget they live in a community the way people in New York are incapable of forgetting. I propose that that "Nice but not Kind" caricature is actually incredibly rare to the point of non-existence. It tends to be used by the right to describe the entire left - as virtue signaling, caring-about-optics, overly politically-correct, social justice warriors. But the people who are using these characterizations are not themselves fighting for meaningful change. They're using this exclusively to criticize caring or small incremental progress forward. Yes, legal protection for trans people is more important than using correct pronouns. But who out there is preaching proper pronoun usage WITHOUT supporting legislation for protection of trans people? Tell me which politicians support these protections, and I'll vote for them, but day-to-day I cant change the law. I CAN change what pronouns I use with my friends and strangers. So do I spend most of my time being "nice but not kind" because I only vote one day out of 365 for politicians that do Kind acts? Even the "liberal vs leftist" comparison is a bit strange because it's entirely US-centric and is part of the way that Americans fool themselves that the Democratic party is in any way progressive. They are centrist by any political spectrum definition, and as such share some of the same "conservative" attitudes to certain types of social progress as their Republican counterparts. So yes, Be kind. If you can only be one, Be kind. But 99% of situations it costs nothing extra to Kind AND Nice. And The situations where one can ONLY be Nice but not Kind are few and far between, and tend to be exaggerated.

5y ago

betwixthewires 5y ago

I think the distinction between niceness and kindness is very accurate, but applied to liberals vs leftists I think is a stretch.

WalterBright 5y ago

virtue: volunteering at a soup kitchen virtue signalling: inviting the press to photograph you volunteering at a soup kitchen virtue: donating anonymously to your favorite cause virtue signalling: demanding the government fund your favorite cause

orwin 5y ago
> virtue: donating anonymously to your favorite cause > virtue signalling: demanding the government fund your favorite cause I thought that as we built and testes political systems, we decided that collegial decisions on fund attribution and nation goal were the best way of doing thing. I actually think lobbying and militant advocacy are the correct way of acting and spending money. If you aren't able to convince people, maybe your idea is not as good as you thought.
- LesZedCB 5y ago
  except that money isn't distributed democratically....... maybe if the government gave everybody a 'democracy fund' of $1000 to be distributed to whatever registered recipients/distributions. no more, no less spending on lobbying.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  I fail to see the virtue in forcibly spending someone else's money on your favorite cause, even if it is a good cause. A litmus test as to whether you really believe it is a good cause is if you're willing to spend your own money on it. And not a token amount, either. Real money.
  - lamontcg 5y ago
    I could send my whole life savings / net worth off to some organization that is addressing climate change and it won't make a drop in the bucket and nothing will change.
    - WalterBright 5y ago

twayt 5y ago

Although kindness is seen as a virtue and niceness a sin in many arenas in life, in some business settings being superficially nice and ruthless is seen as a virtue. I wonder if there is more accessible content discussing how to deal with such people and situations

junon 5y ago

> Kindness is addressing the need, regardless of tone. I've yet to see this put as succinctly as this.

silvestrov 5y ago

I've heard the variation: In LA they say "good morning" and mean "fuck you". In NY they say "fuck you" and mean "good morning".

ericbarrett 5y ago
I've lived in both cities. The LA bit is true. In New York, "fuck you" means "fuck you" and they don't bother with "good morning."
- willcipriano 5y ago
  In Philly someone can call you an asshole (usually worse) and it it can put a smile on your face. Brotherly love man, it's one of the few places I feel like I can be myself.
  - trelane 5y ago
    That definitely sounds like brothers, in my experience. :)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

crooked-v 5y ago

I'm reminded of the musical Into the Woods, which makes this kind of distinction one of its central themes, as particularly embodied by the witch ("I'm not nice, I'm not good, I'm just right"). One of the songs is focused on her confrontation with the musical's set of other fairy-tale characters about how they care more about being "nice" (that is, saving face and not feeling morally culpable about anything) than about either being "good" (taking morally correct actions and accepting personal suffering in the process) or being "right" (fixing the kingdom's major ongoing crisis, whatever the cost).

wolverine876 5y ago
> "right" (fixing the kingdom's major ongoing crisis, whatever the cost) How is that right, if you ignore the costs (such as evil)? What the heck does "right" mean?
- crooked-v 4y ago
  Well, that's a good question, isn't it? None of the characters, including the witch, are without their flaws and problems in their worldview. You might be interested in watching the musical to find out more.
  - wolverine876 4y ago
    I've seen it. Sondheim is brilliant but the musical's extreme relativism, as I understand it - anything is ok as long as you accept the consequences - lost me and didn't seem to have a basis in the story.

quickthrower2 5y ago

This is wonderfully articulate and motivates me at least to aim for a more stoic approach to life. Makes me wonder what I can do to help the world as mostly I don’t do much at all for wider society. At least I don’t tweet nice stuff to compensate! Also as an introvert, helping with a pram on a subway without small talk sounds pretty cool. Shame I don’t live in NYC or similar!

deeg 5y ago

I'd add one more differentiation. "Nice" doesn't require much effort but "kind" does. Being kind might require some sacrifice. Maybe it's voting against the zoning law that will increase your property value.

civilized 5y ago

"Kindness" is one of those words that we've all recently agreed is an Absolute Anchor of Goodness. It's in everyone's mouth and on all the yard signs. But since no one agrees on what Goodness is, we don't agree on what Kindness is either. The "nice vs. kind" distinction is one of the ways we (indirectly) challenge that Absolute. We all agree that the bundle of traits associated with Kindness - being positive, agreeable, caring, and giving - are basically good, but the Devil's always in the details. I think that what a lot of people call Kindness, I call Ruinous Empathy [1] or avoidance. This sort of "kindness" either fails to communicate challenging information, or it bends over backwards to sugarcoat it so much that the message gets lost... which amounts to the same thing. [1] https://www.radicalcandor.com/faq/what-is-ruinous-empathy/ https://www.radicalcandor.com/faq/what-is-ruinous-empathy/

omalleyt 5y ago

Nice is about mannerisms, kind is about actions.

hahaxdxd123 5y ago

Interesting that I can so easily argue the reverse in terms of her political alignments: Leftists: you should be able to have xyz. Oh, no, I don't have a feasible plan to implement it but I'm definitely saying you should have it. (nice) Liberals: here's a massive reduction in child poverty through the expanded EITC (kind) I definitely agree with the geographical divide though, wherein the SF "progressives" are very nice and will put out the "BLM, No one is illegal, etc" sign in the garden but balk at being kind enough to actually build homes to allow those people to live near them. edit: thanks for the downvotes with no constructive criticism, very kind of you!

steveBK123 5y ago
Right you have some of this strain of thought in the more extreme environmental class. Get rid of nuclear plants. Block new solar because it replaces some pretty land. Argue about view obstruction by wind power. Net effect is more natgas power.. and probably in the poorer neighborhoods they ostensibly care about with all their "climate inequality" activism, etc.
hayd 5y ago
I read those BLM signs on people's multi-million dollar houses in SF as "please don't burglarize me".

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

elevenoh 5y ago

Wokism at its essence is Nice > Kind. And nice is near-meaningless.

wolverine876 5y ago
Quite the opposite: It's Good >> Nice/Kind. It's saying things that are very unpopular, pointing out realities that people are uncomfortable with, because it's good and necessary, regardless of the very un-nice, unkind responses you get. The idea is that we cannot fail to talk about and address these things anymore, just because some people are uncomfortable and it's challenging social norms to say them.
- asiachick 5y ago
  No, because it's doesn't work. So the fact that it's ineffective as well as quite often hypocritical means it's optics > results. If you want results, doing the "woke" thing won't get you any.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    > it's doesn't work I think the evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary. Much has changed in the world. For example, looking at some recent issues: Major cities are handling policing much differently; discrimination against women is now toxic to careers; the US Congress has now made lynching a crime and is removing Confederate names from the military. District attorneys in cities have been transformed. Major news media now reports differetly on race than just a few years ago. It's common rhetoric, going way back, to dismiss progressives as powerless, but what people see today as the norm or conservative is what progressives achieved in prior generations. If you're a 'chick' (based on your username), you don't have to live with a male family member and get their permission for everything, can get a full education, be financially independent, can have intimate relations and dress (mostly) how you please without being ostracized, can have careers beyond nursing and teaching, etc. When people woke up and made those changes, years ago, they got the same response as today. But why is it so urgent to shut them down? What is so threatening? What a waste of time - time would be much better spent achieving something ourselves. So much needs to be done.

madrox 5y ago

Applying this to engineering orgs, one of my hiring principles has been “hire kind people.” My thought was that you can teach people lots of things, but you can’t teach people to be kind. I’m probably wrong on that, but it’s seemed true in the context of building teams. You can more easily teach niceness than kindness, anyway. The older I get, the more niceness drives me nuts when not also backed with kindness. If I have to choose who I’d rather work with, I’d rather work with kind people who aren’t nice. They’re not always easy to work with, but I can count on them to work with people instead of complain about them behind their back. This is, of course, not a dichotomy. There are plenty of people who lack both qualities. Those brilliant jerks I am totally fine never hiring again.

Breza 4y ago
The best coworker I've ever had was a CTO who was well known for being grumpy. He leaned into it, with a Darth Vader head on his desk, an internal email signature identifying him as "CTO, Grumpiness," etc. When I actually started working with him on projects, I realized he was unbelievably kind. He taught me most of what I know about software project management and designing architectures. Over the course of a few years, I spent dozens of hours in his office with him going over problems and possible solutions on his whiteboard and making sure I understood, followed by me watching him code a quick proof of concept.
Tarq0n 5y ago
I totally agree that kindness is a trait I love having in teammates, but how do you screen for that in interviews?
- spacemanmatt 5y ago
  Voight-Kampff test is traditional
- madrox 4y ago
  A really great question. In my experience, there is no single set of interview questions that get at that trait. However, you gain some sense of their capacity for kindness in how they answer interpersonal questions, conflict resolution, and how they think about working with teams. Also, in my experience kind people tend to recognize other kind people. I often think this is what "culture fit" x-factors end up amounting to.

sebastianconcpt 5y ago

TL;DR: Not everyone will see leftist politics this way, but I’ve found it grounding and humbling. It’s also easier to track progress

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dang 5y ago

https://microblogrf.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/the-difference-between-la-and-ny-by-the-late/ https://microblogrf.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/the-difference-...

maps7 5y ago

What an uninteresting (set) of posts on HN's frontpage.. I see the irony of my uninteresting comment too! This is just not the content I come to HN for at all.

SV_BubbleTime 5y ago

> He offered no hello, merely stormed into the situation and barked orders at us—drive forward! now rock back! now turn your wheel all the way to the right!—until our car miraculously lurched forward, at which point he hurried unceremoniously back to his car and drove off. I am absolutely certain I have been on the other side of this as the person helping someone completely clueless how to rock a car out of being stuck. That the author calls it “miraculous” still even after retrospect is amusing.

calebm 5y ago

nice = good behavior from external pressure, kind = good behavior from internal desire

JetAlone 5y ago

Am I nice or kind? I'm glad it's not nice xor kind, because I don't think the two have to be mutually exclusive. We're like different people in different contexts, too, psychologically speaking. Maybe I'm nice nand kind right now.

ep103 5y ago

I think the idea here is important, but the word choice could be better clarified. What she is describing is the difference between being polite, and being good. Knowing how to be polite is an important skill for social decorum and practicing empathy. But politeness is performative, it is "skin-deep"; and is very easily and frequently used to both hide and mask a conscious choice to _not_ do good. For example, instead of helping you dig out your car, I could instead, politely, express empathy with your situation. Since our society holds politeness as a virtue, I can now feel good (and be socially rewarded for) having done a slightly good thing. The reality may be, however, that what I have actually done is selfishly excused myself from actually having helped you. Bad actors exploit this phenomenon. And this is widely understood. This is where "Thoughts and Prayers" comes from. This is why a Southerner saying "Bless Your Heart" is understood to be an insult (it translates, roughly to: 'you just said something stupid, so rather than engage with you, I'm going to use politeness to allow me to ignore you / your statement'). This is a large part of what Bo Burnham's recent hit "That Funny Feeling" was about. etc. In my personal life, I have generally found people who exploit this phenomenon to be among the worst people I have to deal with, as people who are bad actors but lack the ability to be polite get filtered out pretty quickly, while these such people can persist and deal damage for quite some time. I will take an impolite good person over a polite bad actor any day of the week. Though, of course, too many people without an understanding of how to be properly polite in close context is its own recipe for problems.

blaser-waffle 4y ago
The Russians have 3 words for truth, like small lies for the sake of getting out of awkward situations, big lies for strategic reasons, and the absolute, real, actual truth. A lot of those "bless your hearts" & "thoughts and prayers" read the same, except we don't have a formal, explicit concept in English of such things.
qubitcoder 4y ago
Very well said. Just a small addendum. As someone who grew up in the south, I'd just like to mention that "Bless Your Heart" could be used in a derogatory manner. But, most often, it's used to express genuine concern for someone going through a tough time. So, don't automatically assume it's an insult :-).

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

I just want to thank whoever posted these articles (both this one and the "Are you a baby?" one) to HN. I think this author is fantastic, and she's stated clearly, but with very evocative writing, some general feelings I've had about the state of society for the past couple years but could never have put into words as well as she has. For one, I consider myself to be someone generally "on the left" politically, but I've felt so nauseated by what I see as the worst performative debates of the leftish mobs ("master to main" anyone), because I feel they share the exact same nauseating tactics of the far (and not-so-far) right: professional victimhood. On the right, the media is "so unfair" and there is a "war against Christmas", while on the left nothing is ever anyone's fault if they weren't the benefit of "privilege" in their life. What I like about this author is she acknowledges the kernels of truth on both sides, but clearly advocates that actual, honest, non-avoidant action is what is so often missing.

Traubenfuchs 5y ago
> someone generally "on the left" politically It's time to abandon this harmful single axis thinking. It leads to "generally left" people being afraid of having "right wing views" and the other way round, creating cognitive dissonance and other bad mental states and mental mono cultures among "the left" and "the right".
- spacemanmatt 4y ago
  I think it's a bit outdated so see identification with "the left" as a single axis. Most of us arrive at such conclusions by concurrence on many axes. I disagree with the analysis about mental mono cultures being created by labels. The dichotomy in views exists whether we use concise language or not.
  - Traubenfuchs 4y ago
    But left and right are two directions on a single axis per definition. I am homosexual and for LGB rights, but feel mostly disdain for Q and especially T and the other made up letters. I support a strong social security system, free health care, livable pensions etc. and I believe the rich should be taxed more, minimum wages should be increased significantly. I am for a very selective immigration and asylum system based on merit of the immigrant for the country (Australia/Canada). "#MY_COUNTRY first!" deeply resonated with my soul, every politician should live that. Am I left? Am I right? I feel like those labels absolutely do not apply to me. When I talk about the "mono culture", what I mean is, for example most of my homosexual peers seem to feel subconsciously forced to support opinions of parties that traditionally support them that are actively harmful to them, e.g. letting Muslim immigrants into the country.

elvis10ten 5y ago

I choose to try to be both, as there is no law of nature that says you have to be nice or kind.

coding123 5y ago

really, liberals vs leftists? People on the east are just 10 to 15 years from living in Florida as right side as you get. I do think the right is MORE KIND in general.

newyankee 5y ago

I could make an argument that most of the Western world or White guilt translates IRL to being NICE to third world countries when in fact what is needed is being KIND.

iovrthoughtthis 5y ago

we're trying to draw really well defined lines between very fuzzy concepts interested to see when the pendulum swings back on this

rendall 5y ago

One of my favorite memories of NYC. I was late catching my train at Penn Station. I was only two or three long blocks away, but dragging a heavy suitcase, and my timely arrival was uncertain. Traffic was decent and a taxi was right nearby, so I hailed, got in, and explained the situation. "I'll get you there", the driver said. Then to my dismay, I realized I only had $2 cash in my wallet. "Shit. Let me out. I only have $2. I'm so sorry." He looked back at me and said solemnly, "You're late, you're broke, and you're not that good looking." Then he turned off his meter, took what money I had, and drove me the rest of the way. I made my train with time to spare, thanks to him.

_qua 5y ago

Come to Chicago where people are both nice and kind

michaelsbradley 5y ago

In my experience, "nice" is toward one end of a spectrum of social-interaction behaviors while "gruff" is toward the other end of that spectrum. Kindness, though, is measured in deeds. The kindest person I've ever encountered was also the gruffest. I'll call him Brother John. I lived in close quarters with him for not quite a year along with a dozen other persons: shared small quarters (lots of bunk beds), meals, chores, recreation, etc. Outside of our living situation the work was back-breaking 24/7/365: running an orphanage plus a home for the infirm. Altogether the ratio was, on average, about 15:1 (residents to care workers). The context was Cap-Haïtien in the early 2000s. There was no backstop, someone needed something you did it for them: sad, you hugged them; hungry, you fed them; poopy, you cleaned them (again); dead, you buried them; and so on. I didn't get along well with Brother John. For the first couple of months, I would smile and acquiesce. It didn't take me long to realize no one got along with him: not the folks within our little community, nor anyone in the surrounding neighborhood... maybe most everyone in the surrounding city had felt his porcupine quills when crossing paths with him? About 8 months in (my time there), Brother John was reassigned; he was sent to one of the community's apostolates in western Africa. His reassignment and departure happened abruptly. An eruption of grief ensued promptly. The thing is, despite his gruffness, Brother John was among the most caring/kindest persons you might ever meet. You needed something: diaper changed? itch scratched? big bag of rice for your family? firm slap in the face? ride to an hours-distant mission hospital? housing for your dead-relation's children? close to death and needed to cry and talk about your fears? He would size up your need and take care of it, or explain why it was beyond his reach (though he'd probably try regardless). And he'd somehow get it done before anyone else barely had time to blink. He'd been doing that for years. People didn't love Brother John and lament his loss after weighing his lack of nice-ness. They knew and experienced him for what he was: a kind man whose like is rare, someone you tell your kids and grandkids about, gruffness and all, with a hope they take it as a lesson about how to selflessly serve your neighbors.

cafard 4y ago

People would help you to dig out of snow in Denver, or give you a tug with a tow chain. In my first blizzard on the East Coast, I was astonished to see a guy offer to pull someone out of the snow for $10.