5 ms·

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) act

by 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
  So the stakes are low, but it's objectively harmful. If you cut in line, it takes longer for me to get through the line than if you weren't there. Compare this to the "Nice" act of throwing out "thoughts and prayers" when someone says their house burned down. I guess a better example is screaming "fuck you" when does something you don't agree with? If "Nice" is expressing a desire to help without helping, being "Mean" is expressing a desire without hurting? I'd need to pull some research, but I'm pretty sure that the mental gains of "thoughts and prayers" is degrees lower than the mental pains of "fuck you", so I felt like they weren't proper equivalents.
- asiachick 5y ago
  Cutting in line is harmful in the grand scheme of things. If everyone cuts society devolves into anarchy. It's only by policing cutters and fostering a culture of it's not okay to cut that we keep society functioning. Sure, in some cultures people still cut but we still have to push back or the society just gets worse and worse.
  - trelane 5y ago
    I'm also trying to figure out if they're abusing niceness or kindness when they cut the line. Perhaps both? They clearly expect people to just let them in and not resist. One time there was a huge line in passport control to come home. A couple tried to cut in front of me, bypassing about a 15 minute wait. I very nicely pointed out where the end of the line was. It was not kind to them perhaps, but it was kind to the rest of the folks that would have to wait a while longer, especially if folks kept cutting because they kept being held up by other cutters, and seeing that cutting worked. So perhaps it's abusing the tradeoff between kindness to them as people and kindness to the rest of the line.
AussieWog93 5y ago
>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"). For real? Revenge, grudges and spite are common as all heck. Think divorce disputes, passive aggression, abusive relationships, bureaucracy. I've seen it more than once in business relationships too.
- moate 5y ago
  Just about everything you described (aside from "bureaucracy" which is a net neutral) could be considered Punishment, or punitive behavior. They're not doing Evil with the goal being harm, but some version of "this will fix things/this will get them to stop being bad". You killed my dog, I'm going to murder everyone in your criminal empire. You're leaving me, so I'm taking the house. You're bad, so I'll be bad. There are very few people who feel they're morally evil (and ironically, those who do are rarely as bad as they think). I think people do bad things, and typically they do it because they feel they have to be the one to do this bad thing in service of a greater goal that they view as good.
asiachick 5y ago
I'm not following your comment in relation to the one you replied to Parent: “Kind and Evil” (there’s institutionalized whatever, so let’s help X by punishing Y). You: Evil (results over optics) "there’s institutionalized whatever, so let’s help X by punishing Y" is not results over optics, it's optics over results. Or maybe that's just what it conjures in my head
- moate 5y ago
  So we agree, the post I was responding to was confusing. If a system has been created (as our "kind vs nice" duality does) and you seek to expand on it, I think you should expand on it in "logical" (ymmv on what "logic" is). So if you add "Evil and Mean" they should a similar duality, IMO. That said, I don't think "Evil/Mean" should be an added axis to the "Kind/Nice" paradigm, because they don't actually bring clarity. It's adding language that doesn't help provide better understanding to the original discussion, but instead confuses. How can you be Kind (good results over good optics) and evil(however you define it)? If I'm being completely honest, felt like OP was trying to inject their personal opinion of the current state of politics into a discussion about personal behavior. When people start complaining about "identity politics" I just immediately assume we disagree politically and try point out what I perceive as flaws.
BurningFrog 5y ago
I think most everyone who actively hurts others have "Motivated Reasoned" up a story about how they deserve it, and this is a noble just action that improves the world.
- moate 5y ago
  I (as well as most social psychologists) agree with you. Everyone's the hero of their own story. You bomb an abortion clinic to "save the children" and you bomb parliament because "the politicians are all corrupt" and you bomb another country because "they would do it to you if given the chance". True APD (anti-social personality disorder) and Narcissism (the 2 disorders where the sufferer is most likely to be "bad for the sake of being bad") relatively rare. Most people have something resembling a reason for why they hurt others.
soundnote 5y ago
> 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"). Contemporary example: Whites are not born white, they are born human but abused by their parents into whiteness. (professor of education recommending reading, btw) Another pleasant lass opined that white people are born into not being human and are demons. People paid to watch. Is it even evil if you're disenfranchising not-people?

by moate 5y ago

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
So the stakes are low, but it's objectively harmful. If you cut in line, it takes longer for me to get through the line than if you weren't there. Compare this to the "Nice" act of throwing out "thoughts and prayers" when someone says their house burned down. I guess a better example is screaming "fuck you" when does something you don't agree with? If "Nice" is expressing a desire to help without helping, being "Mean" is expressing a desire without hurting? I'd need to pull some research, but I'm pretty sure that the mental gains of "thoughts and prayers" is degrees lower than the mental pains of "fuck you", so I felt like they weren't proper equivalents.
asiachick 5y ago
Cutting in line is harmful in the grand scheme of things. If everyone cuts society devolves into anarchy. It's only by policing cutters and fostering a culture of it's not okay to cut that we keep society functioning. Sure, in some cultures people still cut but we still have to push back or the society just gets worse and worse.
- trelane 5y ago
  I'm also trying to figure out if they're abusing niceness or kindness when they cut the line. Perhaps both? They clearly expect people to just let them in and not resist. One time there was a huge line in passport control to come home. A couple tried to cut in front of me, bypassing about a 15 minute wait. I very nicely pointed out where the end of the line was. It was not kind to them perhaps, but it was kind to the rest of the folks that would have to wait a while longer, especially if folks kept cutting because they kept being held up by other cutters, and seeing that cutting worked. So perhaps it's abusing the tradeoff between kindness to them as people and kindness to the rest of the line.

AussieWog93 5y ago

>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"). For real? Revenge, grudges and spite are common as all heck. Think divorce disputes, passive aggression, abusive relationships, bureaucracy. I've seen it more than once in business relationships too.

moate 5y ago
Just about everything you described (aside from "bureaucracy" which is a net neutral) could be considered Punishment, or punitive behavior. They're not doing Evil with the goal being harm, but some version of "this will fix things/this will get them to stop being bad". You killed my dog, I'm going to murder everyone in your criminal empire. You're leaving me, so I'm taking the house. You're bad, so I'll be bad. There are very few people who feel they're morally evil (and ironically, those who do are rarely as bad as they think). I think people do bad things, and typically they do it because they feel they have to be the one to do this bad thing in service of a greater goal that they view as good.

asiachick 5y ago

I'm not following your comment in relation to the one you replied to Parent: “Kind and Evil” (there’s institutionalized whatever, so let’s help X by punishing Y). You: Evil (results over optics) "there’s institutionalized whatever, so let’s help X by punishing Y" is not results over optics, it's optics over results. Or maybe that's just what it conjures in my head

moate 5y ago
So we agree, the post I was responding to was confusing. If a system has been created (as our "kind vs nice" duality does) and you seek to expand on it, I think you should expand on it in "logical" (ymmv on what "logic" is). So if you add "Evil and Mean" they should a similar duality, IMO. That said, I don't think "Evil/Mean" should be an added axis to the "Kind/Nice" paradigm, because they don't actually bring clarity. It's adding language that doesn't help provide better understanding to the original discussion, but instead confuses. How can you be Kind (good results over good optics) and evil(however you define it)? If I'm being completely honest, felt like OP was trying to inject their personal opinion of the current state of politics into a discussion about personal behavior. When people start complaining about "identity politics" I just immediately assume we disagree politically and try point out what I perceive as flaws.

BurningFrog 5y ago

I think most everyone who actively hurts others have "Motivated Reasoned" up a story about how they deserve it, and this is a noble just action that improves the world.

moate 5y ago
I (as well as most social psychologists) agree with you. Everyone's the hero of their own story. You bomb an abortion clinic to "save the children" and you bomb parliament because "the politicians are all corrupt" and you bomb another country because "they would do it to you if given the chance". True APD (anti-social personality disorder) and Narcissism (the 2 disorders where the sufferer is most likely to be "bad for the sake of being bad") relatively rare. Most people have something resembling a reason for why they hurt others.

soundnote 5y ago

> 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"). Contemporary example: Whites are not born white, they are born human but abused by their parents into whiteness. (professor of education recommending reading, btw) Another pleasant lass opined that white people are born into not being human and are demons. People paid to watch. Is it even evil if you're disenfranchising not-people?