4 ms·

Interesting sentiments, but I had first heard them said by someone who managed to, in some ways, do the opposite, all while thinking she was following them. It

Interesting sentiments, but I had first heard them said by someone who managed to, in some ways, do the opposite, all while thinking she was following them. It's in keeping with my experience that the people who talk a great game about goodness and their moral high ground being, well, less than they thought. I am starting to wonder if just the act of proclaiming you're a white hat is the beginning of the descent.

verisimi 3y ago
I think this is most people. People do not verify very much for themselves - they do not know 'if it is true'. They are told a story, believe that story and even call it knowledge. The story itself need have nothing to do with reality, and worse, it may have been placed there to intentionally to mislead. With a false story it is but a small hop to doing evil but calling it useful and good. I won't give any modern examples cos of the downvotes, but think of the stories we are given of Christians destroying non-Christian cultures because they believed they were doing God's work. The principle is that their stories allowed them to believe themselves to be true, useful, good, even as they slaughtered the natives. Their culture feted them. I think this principle of being misled by false stories holds through to today. A false story (premise/assumption) allows individuals/groups to accept a para-logic and para-morality despite the evidence of one's senses.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  But many good things happen every day. Despite many problems, society functions better than ever in human history (if you don't get more granular than perhaps decades). People do need to think for themselves, and a hallmark of free societies is that they do (to varying extents). The doom-and-gloom about humans is getting very well-worn and tired for me.
helpfulContrib 3y ago
I think the reason these precepts are sustained across generations of culture and, indeed, civilization, is because they're based around a fundamental truth - namely, that of survival, and are therefore a 'survival-decision factor' in the telling/usefulness. But it turns out that its one of those factors which, socially applied, radically increases the survival potential of the group - not just the individual. This precept can be applied individually, but is most useful socially. By way of example, in the case of the person whom you would characterize as not having fulfilled the principles, while claiming to do so - you are also manifesting that circumstance. By observing her doing this, and deciding not to apply the principles, didn't you fail to seek truth, be kind, seek to improve the situation, also? That is the crux of these -ism's. They only work if you want them to, because they are driven by willpower and little else, yet they align with the fundamental principle of life, the desire to survive. Truthfulness, kindness and tact are contributing factors to a functional society.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  helpful - very insightful and well written. I hope to see you around!
- at_a_remove 3y ago
  I in no way said that they were precepts I was following. So that's a swing and a miss on the hypocrisy. But my point wasn't about the following, it was about the proclamation of such. Putting on the white hat for all to see.
  - helpfulContrib 3y ago
    Thats the point, you didn't apply the precepts and therefore did not fulfill their purpose - and by so doing, manifested the very thing they were designed to prevent.
wolverine876 3y ago
The claim that trying to do good results in evil is a well-worn trope of reactionary rhetoric, a sort-of universal argument about any collective effort at good. Humans are flawed, our enterprises are flawed, and all will do both good and bad. But that is a useless, binary analysis: It means there is no pure saint or demon - no 100% or 0%; it's just simplistic philosophical theory: Nothing is pure, ok. In reality, every significant distinction is in the range 1% - 99%. Our choice - our free will and moral choice, now that we're out of Eden - is what we will do in that range. Some is easy, some is hard, some is harder. If you don't choose to work at it, you won't be doing much good. And then who will?
- at_a_remove 3y ago
  You missed it. I didn't say trying to do good. I was talking about the proclamation of such. Please respond to what I actually put down.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    You're right to a degree, but maybe try a bit more charm. People don't have to respond according to your strictures. :) We're social creatures. Talking is a necessary and very influential part of doing, especially if you want more than one person to do it. The pen is mightier than the sword.
    - at_a_remove 3y ago
      I think that if you are really doing well, people will seek to emulate your example. Charm amplifies whatever effect -- for good or for ill. It bypasses what passes for the blood-brain barrier and infects. My father is (or was, I am unsure if he is still alive) a tremendously charming individual. It was certainly handy when it came to talking his way out of arrests and charges, influencing people out of money, and so forth. Charm allows for an outsized influence on people, regardless of the wisdom (or lack thereof) in the approach. In business, I have seen the charming destroy departments, stunt otherwise healthy careers, and walk a company off of a cliff. Ah, but they smiled while they did it! And that's what counts, I guess.

verisimi 3y ago

I think this is most people. People do not verify very much for themselves - they do not know 'if it is true'. They are told a story, believe that story and even call it knowledge. The story itself need have nothing to do with reality, and worse, it may have been placed there to intentionally to mislead. With a false story it is but a small hop to doing evil but calling it useful and good. I won't give any modern examples cos of the downvotes, but think of the stories we are given of Christians destroying non-Christian cultures because they believed they were doing God's work. The principle is that their stories allowed them to believe themselves to be true, useful, good, even as they slaughtered the natives. Their culture feted them. I think this principle of being misled by false stories holds through to today. A false story (premise/assumption) allows individuals/groups to accept a para-logic and para-morality despite the evidence of one's senses.

wolverine876 3y ago
But many good things happen every day. Despite many problems, society functions better than ever in human history (if you don't get more granular than perhaps decades). People do need to think for themselves, and a hallmark of free societies is that they do (to varying extents). The doom-and-gloom about humans is getting very well-worn and tired for me.

helpfulContrib 3y ago

I think the reason these precepts are sustained across generations of culture and, indeed, civilization, is because they're based around a fundamental truth - namely, that of survival, and are therefore a 'survival-decision factor' in the telling/usefulness. But it turns out that its one of those factors which, socially applied, radically increases the survival potential of the group - not just the individual. This precept can be applied individually, but is most useful socially. By way of example, in the case of the person whom you would characterize as not having fulfilled the principles, while claiming to do so - you are also manifesting that circumstance. By observing her doing this, and deciding not to apply the principles, didn't you fail to seek truth, be kind, seek to improve the situation, also? That is the crux of these -ism's. They only work if you want them to, because they are driven by willpower and little else, yet they align with the fundamental principle of life, the desire to survive. Truthfulness, kindness and tact are contributing factors to a functional society.

wolverine876 3y ago
helpful - very insightful and well written. I hope to see you around!
at_a_remove 3y ago
I in no way said that they were precepts I was following. So that's a swing and a miss on the hypocrisy. But my point wasn't about the following, it was about the proclamation of such. Putting on the white hat for all to see.
- helpfulContrib 3y ago
  Thats the point, you didn't apply the precepts and therefore did not fulfill their purpose - and by so doing, manifested the very thing they were designed to prevent.

wolverine876 3y ago

The claim that trying to do good results in evil is a well-worn trope of reactionary rhetoric, a sort-of universal argument about any collective effort at good. Humans are flawed, our enterprises are flawed, and all will do both good and bad. But that is a useless, binary analysis: It means there is no pure saint or demon - no 100% or 0%; it's just simplistic philosophical theory: Nothing is pure, ok. In reality, every significant distinction is in the range 1% - 99%. Our choice - our free will and moral choice, now that we're out of Eden - is what we will do in that range. Some is easy, some is hard, some is harder. If you don't choose to work at it, you won't be doing much good. And then who will?

at_a_remove 3y ago
You missed it. I didn't say trying to do good. I was talking about the proclamation of such. Please respond to what I actually put down.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  You're right to a degree, but maybe try a bit more charm. People don't have to respond according to your strictures. :) We're social creatures. Talking is a necessary and very influential part of doing, especially if you want more than one person to do it. The pen is mightier than the sword.
  - at_a_remove 3y ago
    I think that if you are really doing well, people will seek to emulate your example. Charm amplifies whatever effect -- for good or for ill. It bypasses what passes for the blood-brain barrier and infects. My father is (or was, I am unsure if he is still alive) a tremendously charming individual. It was certainly handy when it came to talking his way out of arrests and charges, influencing people out of money, and so forth. Charm allows for an outsized influence on people, regardless of the wisdom (or lack thereof) in the approach. In business, I have seen the charming destroy departments, stunt otherwise healthy careers, and walk a company off of a cliff. Ah, but they smiled while they did it! And that's what counts, I guess.