Why be good? ( ordinary people only, please )

[ElectraAlan]

Before asking why superheroes are moral, perhaps it might be instructive to ask why ordinary people are good. Is it fear of imprisonment, or religious reasons, or something else?

For me, fear of imprisonment. I'm a Christian, but I was told that my sins are forgiven if I ask for forgiveness, so it isn't that. It's also that I'm afraid if I offend someone, they might come back and get me for it later. Unfortunately, that's also the reason I don't want to serve on a jury.

Also, I don't want to hurt other people because I've been hurt by others myself, and I know what it's like. I find that it's no good to hold on to grudges forever, but by all means hold on to them at least a little while. You shouldn't allow people to just walk all over you. Forgive them eventually, just not right away.

[Dan Apodaca]

Guilt, basically.

I always try to think about how I would feel if I was on the other side. But sometimes, the person in question has done something heinous enough to deserve unpleasant punishment.

[BlairH]

Being good is it's own reward. By nature, being good is intrinsicly "good".

[Dan Apodaca]

Being good is it's own reward. By nature, being good is intrinsicly "good".

So, you get a false feeling of superiority.

[The Mirrorball Man]

For me, fear of imprisonment. I'm a Christian, but I was told that my sins are forgiven if I ask for forgiveness, so it isn't that.
That's a really weird interpretation of Christian teachings.

I don't want to lecture you or anything, but in my opinion, a Christian is, litterally, someone who follows Christ's exemple. That's what inspires Christians to do good, and it can't simply be wiped away by the promise of forgiveness. I don't think the concept of Christian forgiveness can be used as a get away free-card, that justifies any kind of evil behavior. That would be pretty pointless.

Personally, I try to be good because I'm a Christian, and I think that by his very nature, Jesus showed us how we were supposed to behave. So I try to treat everybody right and equally, to get rid of my prejudice, to constantly re-examine my beliefs and opinions, to show a good example, to be generous, to challenge authority, to look at the world with eyes unclouded with hate, etc. I'm not always successful, of course. :D

[JerrBear81]

That depends on how you define being good. If being good is following rules then yes I generally am a good person. If being good is being nice, again yes.

Generally why do I do that stuff? Many reasons. The main being it's just the way I am (in regards to niceness), or it's just what I like to do (in regards to rules).

[tangentman]

Not necessarily a "false feeling of superiority". Maybe more like "that giddy feeling we get inside from helping others or doing some other kind of good deed"? Altruism fends off guilt and gratifies us; it's also all the social imprints we receive about what is "good" behavior vs. "bad" behavior. We learn that we "should" help people who ask for it; "think of others first"; the Golden Rule, those moral lessons. Being "good" in the day might even help folks sleep at night--or keep them up worrying about all the troubles in the world. Which is it with some of you?

[BlairH]

So, you get a false feeling of superiority.

Yes Dan. I'm really a bad person.
In fact, in order to become a better person I must be "bad" ;)

bizarro much?

[cactusmaac]

Basically if you're good to other people, they'll return the favour to others, such altruism benefitting society as a whole.

Case in point: Today I went out for a haircut and dropped my car keys just outside the shop. Some good samaritan handed them to the staff, who kept them safe for me until I made my panicked way back. Later on the same day, I held the door open for an elderly couple and went after a woman who left some of her shopping behind by mistake.

[BlairH]

Case in point: Today I went out for a haircut and dropped my car keys just outside the shop. Some good samaritan handed them to the staff, who kept them safe for me until I made my panicked way back. Later on the same day, I held the door open for an elderly couple and went after a woman who left some of her shopping behind by mistake.
It's the little things like that. Stuff like this makes the world worth living in I reckon.

Today, during lunch hour at work: I went to Burger King. I stood in the line as usual untill I was ready to be served. The food was placed on my dining tray and I made my way to the seating area. However a little diminutive old lady swung right into me and sent my freshly prepared diet coke all over the place. She offered to buy me a replacement...She was such a sweet old lady that when she bought my replacement drink, I paid for her lunch as "payback" :D

[Dan Apodaca]

Yes Dan. I'm really a bad person.
In fact, in order to become a better person I must be "bad" ;)

bizarro much?

Nope.

You help people because it makes you feel good. That good feeling is satisfaction with yourself for doing something so good. You think yourself a better person for having done such a thing. Yet, your act of philanthropy is on a very small scale.


I was making a joke, though.

[BlairH]

Nope.

You help people because it makes you feel good. That good feeling is satisfaction with yourself for doing something so good. You think yourself a better person for having done such a thing. Yet, your act of philanthropy is on a very small scale.

Indeed. This is a good thing as it encourages more noble deeds.

[Dan Apodaca]

Indeed. This is a good thing as it encourages more noble deeds.

And more ego.


'Course there's worse things in the world...

[BlairH]

And more ego.


'Course there's worse things in the world...
My ego isn't very big :(
Course I ain't no saint either. Not saying the 2 are connected. I don't know where I'm going here. Where are you going? Are you trying to say you're anti good deeds?

[cactusmaac]

I think he's stalking you, Blair.

[Dan Apodaca]

My ego isn't very big :(
Course I ain't no saint either. Not saying the 2 are connected. I don't know where I'm going here. Where are you going? Are you trying to say you're anti good deeds?

I was trying to say that the extolling of one's own virtues projects a tarnished image.

[BlairH]

I was trying to say that the extolling of one's own virtues projects a tarnished image.
Of course -ultimately- this is of no consequence providing that good deeds are done.

[discostu]

Why be good? because human life flourishes in a peaceful enviroment, and it is only by our virtue of helping eachother(Sticking together) that man has been able to dominate this world.

[Indy24LA]

I think I was nine when I first heard the immortal E.T. say those life altering words, "Be Goooood". And what can I say, I listened.

[Night]

I don't know

The obiovios answer is because The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit were good to me... but then I would be exempt from the thread on being "ordinary" :rolleyes:

[tangentman]

And more ego.


'Course there's worse things in the world...

Why don't you tell us what ISN'T motivated by ego in the human world? While I agree that ego motivates altruism, I also wonder if you're devaluing altruism for that reason? Paraphrasing what Blair said, if another person benefits from an act of kindness, isn't that all that matters in the end?

[Naldo]

Actually, being "good" is a basic and primitive survival instinct common with social mammals.

Since man, comparatively, is physically weak, it is in his/her own best interest to fit within a tribal group. In order to be accepted within that group the individual must follow rules that are mutually beneficial to all those within that group.

As the groups have increased in size and sub groups have formed, more specific behaviors defined as "good" have evolved within those groups. Violate these rules and the individual is cast out (or into prison as the case may be now).

And I think it's rather obvious that one hairless, fangless, clawless, slow human being is in MUCH greater danger than is a group of them.

Don't need a bible or god or 10 commandments to make people good. It's the smart thing to do.

[Mr. Nobody]

Basically, because i like the idea of being treated with respect, and that to my mind demands treating other people with respect.

[K'Nort]

Of course -ultimately- this is of no consequence providing that good deeds are done.

Actually, that one has been debated for centuries. Depending on what you mean by consequence. Basically, hen you do good deeds for the wrong reasons, they're still good deeds but they don't make you a good person.


It's not about religion. It's much more universal than that. Although I agree that the 'all sins forgiven' thing isn't quite accurate.

Mostly, it's part of the social compact. We owe it to one another, and to ourselves, in order to function as a society. And the nicer we are, the happier everyone is, so then the more peaceful and better off everyone is, and that logically makes for warm fuzzies all round.

[StoneGold]

What the hell are ordinary people, anyways?

[Devon C.]

Why be good? Simple. You'll get a spanking if you're bad.

[StoneGold]

Why be good? Simple. You'll get a spanking if you're bad.
Isn't that incentive to be bad?
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0865620865.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

[Nitmo]

As the old saying goes:

"What goes around comes around" or vice-versa


woo! 1K posts

[Rachel Grey]

Be excellent to each other! And party on dudes! :D

[StoneGold]

Be excellent to each other! And party on dudes! :D
And what did it get Alex Winter? Absolutely nothing.

[Devon C.]

And what did it get Alex Winter? Absolutely nothing.
And then there's Ferris Bueller, too.

[The Mirrorball Man]

And what did it get Alex Winter? Absolutely nothing.
Really? I thought that was war.

[Gilda Dent]

At a social level, people are good because only when people are good, as in do things that promote the survival and continuation of that society, only when most do good for society does the society thrive and continue.

At a personal level, it's a combination of selfishness and conformity. Are humans basically good or evil? I'd say neither, really. Humans are basically selfish, and do what best meets their immediate psychological needs. Biology helps build in rewards for certain behaviors that promote the survival of the species. Society does the rest. We learn early on that certain behaviors bring rewards in the form of praise, smiles, reinforcement from the big people around us, and other behaviors bring punishment, and eventually we internalize those concepts. Once this happens, the rewards and punishments come from within, in the form of guilt and feeling good after having done good. Thus, we do good to avoid guilt and to seek the positive feeling that comes from it; selfishness at work, avoiding punishment and seeking reward, in this case, punishment and reward that come from within.

Gilda

[KameTen]

I don't know if I could agree with that Gilda, but if that's what you think, then its what you think.

As for me, people do go because they just do good. The reasoning changes with the individual, and the individual lives with the reasoning because it makes sense to them. Placing some sort of subtext, positive or negative, within the act only serves to diminish the simplicity of the act in itself. We act because we can, whether good or evil, in whatever rationalization that you place within the category.

I do good because I can. My reasoning is that most people deserve at least one decent moment in their lives, whether in a small situation or a large situation. Whether it grants happyness, or causes sadness, is left to the aftermath. Contradictive, yes, but if it was there or not, chances are, I still do what I do.

Something like that.

[Rachel Grey]

And what did it get Alex Winter? Absolutely nothing.

Helpfully unbunches StoneGold's underpants. There you go. Washes her hands thorughly. :D

[Sanagi]

What the hell are ordinary people, anyways?
At first I was wondering if I was being excluded from this thread.

Anyways, for me, there's all kinds of things that could be going through my head. It's in my nature to want everyone to be happy, which to some extent just means I'm following my programming. Fear of getting caught definitely looms large, though, when it comes to other stuff, like say theft from a huge corporation that probably wouldn't be hurt by missing a little bit here and there.

Basically I like to be nice and sometimes I even do it for more than just selfish reasons.

[Jared_Humpherys]

I try to be good because I acknowledge the virtues of Buddha's Four Noble Truths, Confucius' Ren, Li, xiao, and Yi, and Aristotle's eudaimonia(and his ideas behind Nicomachean Ethics). Then again, as an ethical skeptic(and for other reasons), I sometimes find it harder than others to see good in the world.

[Gilda Dent]

To clarify, I do believe in altruism and try to practice it as often as feasible. For example, when I buy stamps, I get them from the machine with a $20 bill, and save those dollar coins to give away to homeless people. I do this because I've been blessed with ability and a good education and a wonderful spouse. Others aren't so lucky, so I do what I can to help them. I do this because it makes me feel good to do it. That's what altruism is, doing good without expectation of external reward. The reward comes from inside.

There are some people whose internal sense of duty is so strong that they'll actively sacrifice their own personal needs for those of others. Ordinary people who actively attempt to do good without expecting anything in return except for the satisfaction that comes from having done good, having done what is necessary, having done something that nobody else was willing to do. I've known some people like this, I've known real heroes.

That I believe the psychological mechanism involved is essentially selfish doesn't mean that I don't celebrate the great accomplishments of such people, that I don't celebrate the little everyday kindnesses people do for each other. I do. I believe in morals, in good and evil, in right and wrong, and I admire those who choose to do right.

I don't believe that there is some external force, some spirit of good and evil, just a psychological state that either predisposes people to do good or do evil, but this does not in my mind diminish the degree to which I appreciate or am offended by their actions.

Gilda

[K'Nort]

What the hell are ordinary people, anyways?

I'm assuming he means stick to real life rather than discussing the motivations of super heroes.

[StoneGold]

Helpfully unbunches StoneGold's underpants. There you go. Washes her hands thorughly. :D
Always knew you were just trying to get in my pants.

[Deathlok]

Is not part of the being good thing having the choice to relieve the suffering and/or struggles of others?

I cannot save the entire world, but I do have the choice to assist someone in need when I chance upon it...........

I know whats its like to require assistence & receive NO help. I do not want others to have to endure that, so I do my part whenever I can.

[Mike Smith]

I think in most parts of the world "good" had evolved into a naturally practiced social construct. It is almost an innate teaching from values thousands of years of building civilization has produced...some tradition of it is steeped in religion, societies having to make rules for survival (especially in tough climates with scarce resources), or needing discipline in being militaristic societies. All of these different elements of discipline and funtioning with others is based on the concept of ORDER, which to me is what good represents.

People are good in order to maintain order and increase order. When we deem someone as bad, not good, it is because they have violated order in a physical, idealogical, or for some a religious sense. So good basically is an intangible condition that people generally accept from tradition, practice out of habit and security, and teach due to experience that order works.

[Noah Johnson]

My own, atheist, perspective on the question of why be good actually centers around the fact that we, humanity, are it.

We're it. There's no higher power, there's no guiding force, there's no cosmic spirit, and there's damn sure no divine plan. If there were, we wouldn't have to be good. But there's just us.

Which means that if there is going to be any justice, any kindness, any human decency in the world, it's going to have to come from us. The universe is not fair, it is not kind, it does not give a crap. Only we do.

And we're flawed, we're petty, we're selfish and cruel and thoughtless. But we have to be good despite our worse natures, because nobody else is going to do it.

We are all in this together, and the only thing we have to count on is each other.

[Dennis K]

ask why ordinary people are good

Because God knows that there are enough people acting like c*cks out there.

[Rachel Grey]

Always knew you were just trying to get in my pants.

Hey, you've got the Shatner avatar now. What girl (of any speicies) can resist Captain Kirk?


Oh BTW you really need to wash the skidmarks off those things.

[heretic]

My answer: Why Not?

Despite being a Deist/Agnostic at best, I freely consider the Golden Rule as expounded by Jesus of Nazereth as a guiding personal principle....

... and who knows, the person I help could well be materially grateful. :D

HTG

[west3man]

Before asking why superheroes are moral, perhaps it might be instructive to ask why ordinary people are good. Is it fear of imprisonment, or religious reasons, or something else?
I think that, in many cases, the first two are pretty similar.

Fear or repercussions... I should be more specific... Fear of punishment, in this life or the next, is what keeps many people from doing certain bad things. Removing the threat of punishment emboldens. I suspect this is sometimes the case on the internet, but I try to give the BotD, anyway.


But yeah, I think people would steal, maim, and kill much more often if it they didn't fear man's or God's punishment. I think this is largely supported by taking a look at present and past situations in which people had reason to believe they'd be able to get away with something "bad" because it was temporarily or technically legal.

Beating up suspects, torturing prisoners, online interactions, non-violent abuse of authority, international military action, petty theft, ...

I remember a class I took in which the professor asked if we thought there'd be more (apparently-) gay and bi-sexual people in this country if there weren't such a stigma attached to homosexuality (This was 10 years, ago, btw). I think that, if define the term rather loosely (then AND now) that this perspective is supported by the (faux-?)lesbianism that's so "popular," now.


Fewer people negatively judge certain behavior? Okay. Then more people will consider it. So, however we define "good" or "bad," acceptance or lack of punishment increases the chances people will do the thing.




Me? I believe pennies matter, especially if we want dollars. So, I try to make contributions which bring us closer to the goal (that goal being a "good" world) and I try to encourage that behavior in others... sometimes even those who supposedly have the same goal, but whose actions are counterproductive TO that goal.

[Paradox]

I do "good" for various reasons, although the all powerful "glow of satisfaction" is right there up at the top. I also feel a debt to the general populace, because help has come to me from such a place many times. There's also "there but for the grace go I" syndrome. Hey, I've got a roof over my head, food in my belly, etc...let's help someone else get there.

My views on "doing good" actually had more to do with shaping my religious views than vice versa.

[ElectraAlan]

That's a really weird interpretation of Christian teachings.

I don't want to lecture you or anything, but in my opinion, a Christian is, litterally, someone who follows Christ's exemple. That's what inspires Christians to do good, and it can't simply be wiped away by the promise of forgiveness. I don't think the concept of Christian forgiveness can be used as a get away free-card, that justifies any kind of evil behavior. That would be pretty pointless.

Personally, I try to be good because I'm a Christian, and I think that by his very nature, Jesus showed us how we were supposed to behave. So I try to treat everybody right and equally, to get rid of my prejudice, to constantly re-examine my beliefs and opinions, to show a good example, to be generous, to challenge authority, to look at the world with eyes unclouded with hate, etc. I'm not always successful, of course. :D

What are you saying? That our sins aren't forgiven?

Sorry it took so long to come back to this thread, but I didn't know that it had been moved.

I'm a Christian for purely selfish reasons. I don't want to go to hell. So please don't speak for all Christians and tell me "what inspires Christians to do good." I may not be a very good Christian, but I am a Christian, so surely we can conclude that there is at least one Christian who is inspired by fear of hell and not Christ's example.

You tell me Christian forgiveness is "pretty pointless?" I thought it was the point, that salvation is a gift. You don't have to earn it by being good, you just have to accept it. It seems to me that a Christian is someone who accepts the salvation offered by Christ, not someone who just tries to imitate Christ. You could imitate Christ without even believing that Christ is the Messiah.

[Jeff Brady]

I'm a Christian for purely selfish reasons.

Then you're not actually a Christian.

[Paul McEnery]

Then you're not actually a Christian.
Yeah. Sorry mate, but I'm with Jeff. If all you're trying to do is weasel out of Hell on a technicality, you've missed the point.

You do Chrisitianity properly (i.e. actually have Christ in your life, experience the power of divine redemption, and all that jazz), then the business of doing good becomes a moot point.

Mr. 'Dox is already part of the Kingdom of Heaven, because he gets it. Fred Phelps was damned long ago, because he doesn't.

Going through the motions with the magic words is an irrelevance.

[StoneGold]

Mr. 'Dox is already part of the Kingdom of Heaven, because he gets it. Fred Phelps was damned long ago, because he doesn't.


Well, Dox doesn't, but that's because of the incident with the metermaid and the chimpanzee.

[Paul McEnery]

Well, Dox doesn't, but that's because of the incident with the metermaid and the chimpanzee.
Listen. The metermaid and the chimpanzee are now sharing domestic bliss in a Toronto pied a terre. Dox gets points for stepping back and letting nature take its course.

[Calybos]

The notion that people are only "good" out of guilt or fear of punishment is the foundation of many religions... which I why I usually want nothing to do with religion. It's a sick and manipulative system that assumes people are inherently bad and need to be threatened into goodness.

Likewise, the promise of a reward--either karma or Eternal Bliss--assumes the same, but promises the carrot instead of the stick. "You're still basically evil, but we can bribe you to do good" is the message here.

Personally, I prefer to think better of humanity. I think good behavior can be motivated by simple virtues: honor, honesty, compassion, empathy. Maybe a sociologist would describe that as self-interest raised to the next level (survival of the society), but I still prefer it to threats or bribes which assume I'm evil and selfish by nature.

[west3man]

The notion that people are only "good" out of guilt or fear of punishment is the foundation of many religions... which I why I usually want nothing to do with religion. It's a sick and manipulative system that assumes people are inherently bad and need to be threatened into goodness.

Likewise, the promise of a reward--either karma or Eternal Bliss--assumes the same, but promises the carrot instead of the stick. "You're still basically evil, but we can bribe you to do good" is the message here.

Personally, I prefer to think better of humanity. I think good behavior can be motivated by simple virtues: honor, honesty, compassion, empathy. Maybe a sociologist would describe that as self-interest raised to the next level (survival of the society), but I still prefer it to threats or bribes which assume I'm evil and selfish by nature.
Why do you think that's the assumption? The "threats" or "bribes" could be out there only for those who ARE "evil and selfish by nature."


Question for you, though: Do you think the world would have a lot more "bad" behavior, if there were no such "threats or bribes?"

[Winslow]

The notion that people are only "good" out of guilt or fear of punishment is the foundation of many religions... which I why I usually want nothing to do with religion. It's a sick and manipulative system that assumes people are inherently bad and need to be threatened into goodness.

Likewise, the promise of a reward--either karma or Eternal Bliss--assumes the same, but promises the carrot instead of the stick. "You're still basically evil, but we can bribe you to do good" is the message here.

Personally, I prefer to think better of humanity. I think good behavior can be motivated by simple virtues: honor, honesty, compassion, empathy. Maybe a sociologist would describe that as self-interest raised to the next level (survival of the society), but I still prefer it to threats or bribes which assume I'm evil and selfish by nature. (Emphasis Winslow)

But isn't the avoidance of punishment and the pursuit of pleasure "self-interest?" :confused: What is "self-interest raised to the next level?"

I don't understand the dichotomy you're trying to make.

The existence of goverment, and police, and security, and door locks, and armies and navies etc., are essentially reminders that people need some sort of slap to keep them in line. History pretty much bears that out. How do you explain that?

And every ethic states "actions have consequences" (sometimes a kick in the ass, sometimes a pat on the back).

So what sort of ethic are you proposing?

[Night]

I'm a Christian for purely selfish reasons. I don't want to go to hell. So please don't speak for all Christians and tell me "what inspires Christians to do good." I may not be a very good Christian, but I am a Christian, so surely we can conclude that there is at least one Christian who is inspired by fear of hell and not Christ's example. So are you telling me that you want what Jesus offers without knowing one thing about the person giving it to you or why he would give away such a big thing.You tell me Christian forgiveness is "pretty pointless?" I thought it was the point, that salvation is a gift. You don't have to earn it by being good, you just have to accept it. It seems to me that a Christian is someone who accepts the salvation offered by Christ, not someone who just tries to imitate Christ. You could imitate Christ without even believing that Christ is the Messiah. Forgiveness is the key! However, it becomes pointless to the forgiven if no change occurs. You get forgiveness of your sins so that you can leave them behind you and start to live. If you get forgiven and but immediately return to your walk towards death’s door, what has forgiveness gotten you? He has to be both Lord and Savior to be truly saved by that covenant.To what conclusion, then, shall we come? Are we to persist in sinning in order that the grace extended to us may be the greater? No, indeed; how shall we who have died to sin, live in it any longer? (Rom 6:1-2 Weymouth)

[onizuka]

i'd describe myself to be fairly good. i got some pretty high morals and ethics. and i think most of em come from reading a lot of Spidey books when i was a kid.

[onizuka]

Why be good? because human life flourishes in a peaceful enviroment, and it is only by our virtue of helping eachother(Sticking together) that man has been able to dominate this world.

that's pretty profound dude. if only everyone could get behind that

[Calybos]

I consider "goodness" to be acts of putting the interests of others ahead of oneself. Yes, the avoidance of punishment and pursuit of pleasure ARE self-interest... that's why I view them as less virtuous than beneficial acts pursued with no personal interest in mind (anonymous donations to charity, as one example).

If you behave decently only because you've been threatened or bribed, then you get moral ACTIONS without moral MOTIVATIONS. In other words, you do good without being truly good yourself... simply because you see an angle in it that benefits you.

True virtue has more than selfishness at its core. And yes, we live in a less-than-ideal world where appeals to selfish interests--the threat of punishment, jail time, etc.--are necessary to ensure cooperation and harmony. But that doesn't make the law "virtuous" or "good"... simply necessary.

And since this is a comics forum, some superhero examples are appropriate. Spider-Man tries to make a living off of his exploits--but it's not his primary motivation. Indeed, there are many other ways he could use his powers and talents to better benefit himself. But he's concerned with more than self-interest, or rewards, or the threat of punishment; he genuinely tries to help people because it's the right thing to do. In fact, his secret identity even ensures that he WON'T personally benefit from helping others.

Ditto for Superman, Captain America, etc. And it goes without saying that a paid hireling of AIM or Hydra doesn't qualify as "heroic" for that same reason (along with many others, of course). Doing good, even when you're in no danger of being punished OR rewarded, is true heroism.

[west3man]

I wasn't talking about how virtuous laws and other elements I'm skipping from your post - which is not to say that I disagree with most of your points. I just wanted to address the following:And yes, we live in a less-than-ideal world where appeals to selfish interests--the threat of punishment, jail time, etc.--are necessary to ensure cooperation and harmony. If you agree that it's necessary, then I don't get your apparent offense at the fact that "The notion that people are only 'good' out of guilt or fear of punishment is the foundation of many religions..."

Maybe I missed some context somewhere, though.

[Michael P]

What are you saying? That our sins aren't forgiven?
No, he's saying they're not excused.

[Calybos]

If you agree that it's necessary, then I don't get your apparent offense at the fact that "The notion that people are only 'good' out of guilt or fear of punishment is the foundation of many religions..."

Laws don't address questions of good or evil, virtue vs. vice; religion does.

Obeying the law doesn't make you a "good" person, and that's not the point of laws. Laws exist to produce a functional society, and they only address behavior (not motivation).

"Good," on the other hand, is a function of motivation as much as actions. And religion DOES address questions of good and evil, both in intent and behavior.

In saying that humanity needs threats and rewards to produce good behavior (not just law-abiding, but GOOD), the religion that embraces this perspective also implies that humans are inherently evil and selfish. The law makes no such assumptions, because it concerns itself solely with actions.

[west3man]

Thanks for explaining.Laws don't address questions of good or evil, virtue vs. vice; religion does.

Obeying the law doesn't make you a "good" person, and that's not the point of laws. Laws exist to produce a functional society, and they only address behavior (not motivation).

"Good," on the other hand, is a function of motivation as much as actions. And religion DOES address questions of good and evil, both in intent and behavior.

In saying that humanity needs threats and rewards to produce good behavior (not just law-abiding, but GOOD), the religion that embraces this perspective also implies that humans are inherently evil and selfish. The law makes no such assumptions, because it concerns itself solely with actions.
You don't think laws 1) deal with motivation and 2) suggest that the actions of "humans are inherently evil and selfish?"

Interesting discussion, btw.

[Calybos]

I think laws don't address the question of good vs. evil at all, though it's easy to ascribe those terms when discussing specific laws and crimes. After all, it's easy to judge a murderer "evil" in addition to being a criminal... yet a person who runs a red light is neither good nor evil (inherently, based on this one act)--he's simply a lawbreaker.

And yes, laws do deal with intent in determining the severity of some crimes. It's not a clear-cut division. But keep in mind, the trial and sentencing don't find a person "evil"--they find you guilty (of breaking a specific law), nothing more.

[ElectraAlan]

Then you're not actually a Christian.

I am sick to death of Christians who insist that Christ did not mean what He said. "I am the resurrection and the life," sayeth the Lord. "He that believeth in me shall have eternal life." So either He's right, or you're right.

[YoursTruly]

I try to be a good person because I don't think there are enough of them left in the world. I think that if I show the world (or at least the small part of it who actually come into contact with me) that there are genuinely loving, caring people out there... they'll spread that message instead of being selfish. Plus, I always thought that the "do unto others" and "you reap what you sew" ideas made alot of sense. I want good things to come back to me so I do good things.

[Cotton]

Simple: Golden Rule, treat others as you want to be treated.

[Pól Rua]

ordinary people only, please

But, but... I'm EXTRAordinary.

*sulks*

[Jeff Brady]

I am sick to death of Christians who insist that Christ did not mean what He said. "I am the resurrection and the life," sayeth the Lord. "He that believeth in me shall have eternal life." So either He's right, or you're right.

I'm not a Christian.

Also, you can't just pick and choose which of Jesus' teachings to follow and which to ignore out of convenience. If you don't believe it in your heart and mind, then you are not following His example.

[ElectraAlan]

I'm not a Christian.

Also, you can't just pick and choose which of Jesus' teachings to follow and which to ignore out of convenience. If you don't believe it in your heart and mind, then you are not following His example.

What am I ignoring? Where does it say in the Bible that if we sin we're going to go to hell?

[ElectraAlan]

Then you're not actually a Christian.

From dictionary.com, the definition of a Christian: One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.

Since it says "or", I have to believe that there's two different ways of being a Christian. I believe that Christ is the Messiah, so don't ever tell me that I'm not a Christian, no matter how much I sin.

[Alex]

It's a combination.
Society as we know it evolved with some set rules, you don't kill, you don't steal, you don't rape, because those things could hurt a society, and when they were officialy made laws, they were considered good morally.
Growing up in a society that has those laws, and when we see it in books, movies, tv shows, and taught by our parents, we beleive in the same set of morals.
It's not a christian thing, unless you consider that most of the western cultures were founded on juedo/christian values (which, i suppose, you have to) it's just how everyone learns. Is it an innate feeling that we shouldn't do those things? Hard to say since they have been considered wrong for so long.
Calybos broke it down very well when he said
"I think laws don't address the question of good vs. evil at all, though it's easy to ascribe those terms when discussing specific laws and crimes. After all, it's easy to judge a murderer "evil" in addition to being a criminal... yet a person who runs a red light is neither good nor evil (inherently, based on this one act)--he's simply a lawbreaker."
The law in itself doesn't judge good or bad clearly.
Of course, if you want to get into the really good discussion, talk about justice in it's relation to law.
A man kills another guys children, the man of the murdered family kills the guy, and goes to jail for it.

[StoneGold]

A man kills another guys children, the man of the murdered family kills the guy, and goes to jail for it.
Not if he has a good lawyer. But he still might have to pay in the civil suit.

[Guts/Batman]

Well for me it's like this...

Until a person pisses me off doing something I don't like, I treat them well because of the very fact they are human and they haven't done anything to inflct damage on me (knowingly).

That's just a long winded way of saying...Treat others the way you wanna be treated.

[Alex]

Not if he has a good lawyer. But he still might have to pay in the civil suit.
Well, if he plans it out and then kills the guy, im pretty sure he goes to jail.
If he does it right after....i think he still goes to jail, unless it's self defense, but i didn't intend for it to be a self defense situation.

[Jeff Brady]

From dictionary.com, the definition of a Christian: One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.

Since it says "or", I have to believe that there's two different ways of being a Christian. I believe that Christ is the Messiah, so don't ever tell me that I'm not a Christian, no matter how much I sin.

It doesn't matter if you sin or not. Like you said, you only believe for selfish reasons. This is not true faith.

[Gumbo Maximillian]

It doesn't matter if you sin or not. Like you said, you only believe for selfish reasons. This is not true faith.


Depends how you look at it; he believes despite lack of evidence and thinks the bible is true.

His primary motivation is selfish but it still takes faith to believe it in the first place.

Now if the argument is that in order to be a christian you have to actually live by the values taught by Jesus much in the same way that in order to be a vegetarian you have to not eat meat.

You may respect their code of life, ethics, etc....and so on but if you eat meat your not a vegetarian.

So you might make the argument that if you don't even attempt to live life the christian way your not a christian.

Of course that doesn't rule out being forgiven if he's truely sorry for his sins and believes in Jesus.

[Gumbo Maximillian]

Anyways on "why be good?"

Well; if I do something that I feel is bad, I "generally" don't feel good about it and may even have guilt.

After awhile the guilt may work like a shock prod or something so I start doing good deeds without even thinking about, much like someone who jumps in front of a car because he see's someone in danger.

Of course you might argue if that is really good or not; if the act of being good has reached a point where its instinct or programming.

After all a robot programmed to protect people isn't good if it jumps in front of a car to save someone, thats just how its programmed to do.

In order to be a truely good act the motivation behind the act must be inaccordance and as such an act that is instinct/programming might be argued as lacking moral truth. So an unthinking act might be argued to be just that; an unthought act. Without thought there is no morality, good or evil.

So basically it comes down to these reasons

Reward: Either mentally or financially
Punishment: Either via guilt, the legal system or something else
Programming: It just instinct by that point, its just what we do.

[K'Nort]

What am I ignoring? Where does it say in the Bible that if we sin we're going to go to hell?

Matthew 13?

[Night]

I am sick to death of Christians who insist that Christ did not mean what He said. "I am the resurrection and the life," sayeth the Lord. "He that believeth in me shall have eternal life." So either He's right, or you're right. Well, if you want it from Christ himself.... Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will tell me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, didn't we prophesy in your name, in your name cast out demons, and in your name do many mighty works?' Then I will tell them, 'I never knew you. Depart from me, you who work iniquity.' (Matt 7:21-23) You may ask then how can the same person say these two things and have them both be right? Truly "believing" in him is accepting who he claims to be and all that accompanies it. If you believe he is the almighty with all authority, then what he says about life is true, and your eyes also become open to sin and sin becomes painful to your soul and you pull away from it and toward God. Yes, you will still stumble from time to time; but you're more aware of what you do and how it affects things in the spiritual realm. When Jesus called to his apostles he did he say "believe me and sit in your sins".... no, he said "follow me" ... to other's he forgave sins he said "you're forgiven, go and sin no more" Believing in him requires knowing about him. Jesus is patient… he doesn’t expect you to come to him fully healed (he came to heal the unhealthy), but he does expect you to take what he gives you into yourself and allow it work in your life. Just like you can believe medicine will help you get physically well, but it doesn’t do anything until you apply it to yourself…. If you believe the medicine will cure you… take it.

[StoneGold]

Well, if you want it from Christ himself.... .
Ohhhhhh..... TESTIFY, muthafucka!!!!

[Dr. Hfuhruhurr]

An interesting take on the question by the taller, louder half of Penn & Teller here: (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5015557)

There is No God
by Penn Jillette



Morning Edition, November 21, 2005 · I believe that there is no God. I'm beyond Atheism. Atheism is not believing in God. Not believing in God is easy -- you can't prove a negative, so there's no work to do. You can't prove that there isn't an elephant inside the trunk of my car. You sure? How about now? Maybe he was just hiding before. Check again. Did I mention that my personal heartfelt definition of the word "elephant" includes mystery, order, goodness, love and a spare tire?

So, anyone with a love for truth outside of herself has to start with no belief in God and then look for evidence of God. She needs to search for some objective evidence of a supernatural power. All the people I write e-mails to often are still stuck at this searching stage. The Atheism part is easy.

But, this "This I Believe" thing seems to demand something more personal, some leap of faith that helps one see life's big picture, some rules to live by. So, I'm saying, "This I believe: I believe there is no God."

Having taken that step, it informs every moment of my life. I'm not greedy. I have love, blue skies, rainbows and Hallmark cards, and that has to be enough. It has to be enough, but it's everything in the world and everything in the world is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more. Just the love of my family that raised me and the family I'm raising now is enough that I don't need heaven. I won the huge genetic lottery and I get joy every day.

Believing there's no God means I can't really be forgiven except by kindness and faulty memories. That's good; it makes me want to be more thoughtful. I have to try to treat people right the first time around.

Believing there's no God stops me from being solipsistic. I can read ideas from all different people from all different cultures. Without God, we can agree on reality, and I can keep learning where I'm wrong. We can all keep adjusting, so we can really communicate. I don't travel in circles where people say, "I have faith, I believe this in my heart and nothing you can say or do can shake my faith." That's just a long-winded religious way to say, "shut up," or another two words that the FCC likes less. But all obscenity is less insulting than, "How I was brought up and my imaginary friend means more to me than anything you can ever say or do." So, believing there is no God lets me be proven wrong and that's always fun. It means I'm learning something.

Believing there is no God means the suffering I've seen in my family, and indeed all the suffering in the world, isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just testing us, but rather something we all may be able to help others with in the future. No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future.

Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jell-o and all the other things I can prove and that make this life the best life I will ever have.

[Slam_Bradley]

I think laws don't address the question of good vs. evil at all, though it's easy to ascribe those terms when discussing specific laws and crimes. After all, it's easy to judge a murderer "evil" in addition to being a criminal... yet a person who runs a red light is neither good nor evil (inherently, based on this one act)--he's simply a lawbreaker.

And yes, laws do deal with intent in determining the severity of some crimes. It's not a clear-cut division. But keep in mind, the trial and sentencing don't find a person "evil"--they find you guilty (of breaking a specific law), nothing more.


To an extent laws do make some distinctions between evil and "simple lawbreaking" The latin terms are malum in se and malum prohibitum. Acts which are malum in se are recognized to be evil and involve illegality from the very nature of act upon principles of natural, moral and public law. These are mostly common-law crimes against the person (murder, battery, mayhem), property (larceny) or combined (burglary, robbery). To quote Black's Law Dictionary, "An act is malum in se when it is inherently and essentially evil, that is, immoral in its nature and injurious in its consequences, without any regard to the fact of its being noticed or punished by the law of the state."

Malum prohibitum is literally a wrong prohibited. "A thing that is wrong because prohibited; an act which is not inherently immoral, but becomes so because its commission is expressly forbidden by positive law." This includes most violations of administrative matters...Driving without a license, Fish & Game violations, alcohol offenses, etc.

[ElectraAlan]

Well, if you want it from Christ himself.... Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will tell me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, didn't we prophesy in your name, in your name cast out demons, and in your name do many mighty works?' Then I will tell them, 'I never knew you. Depart from me, you who work iniquity.' (Matt 7:21-23)

OK, but at least there's nothing here that says I have to love God to go to Heaven. I can still be a Christian for selfish reasons.

[StoneGold]

God, I love whenever ElectraAlan pops his head back in and resurrected this dead thread.

[Michael P]

God, I love whenever ElectraAlan pops his head back in and resurrected this dead thread.
He's Thread Jesus!

[Mike Smash!]

Basically if you're good to other people, they'll return the favour to others, such altruism benefitting society as a whole.

Case in point: Today I went out for a haircut and dropped my car keys just outside the shop. Some good samaritan handed them to the staff, who kept them safe for me until I made my panicked way back. Later on the same day, I held the door open for an elderly couple and went after a woman who left some of her shopping behind by mistake.Basically, yes.

For it's a sense of empathy and a tiny bit of pragmatism. I ask myself "would I want someone treating me like that?" and realizing that it does rub off on people in exactly the same way that cactus described. I've let somebody merge in front of me in really bad traffic only to see them slow down and allow another driver to merge.

Being nice is contagious. Being an ass, doubly so.

[StoneGold]

He's Thread Jesus!
Yeah, but Jesus only did it once.

[Guts/Batman]

Yeah, but Jesus only did it once.

That we know of... ;)

[StoneGold]

That we know of... ;)
You're right, I forgot about the time we thought Jesus had died, but it turns out the Holy Ghost had just cloned him and put his real body in suspended animation at the bottom of the Galilee, until the Avengers found him.


I ran out of biblical versions.

[jimmyboy]

My understanding of biblical Christianity is that we do good things because we are forgiven, and therefore in right standing with God, not in order to be forgiven. It's the spiritual regeneration and the Spirit of God within the believer that spurs them on to more and more good works, so that God can be glorified through them. Jesus even told us in Matthew 5 to let our good works shine, so that God can get the glory. Thus, if you're doing the good works to make yourself look good, then you're just like the religious leaders of Christ's day, whom he spoke against more harshly than anyone else.
Being "good" in the day might even help folks sleep at night--or keep them up worrying about all the troubles in the world. Which is it with some of you?
For me, the former is very true. Even if life situations are not so great (health, work, money, etc), if I know I'm doing the right thing in a given situation, then I'm more at peace in my heart. And inner peace is what helps me relax and sleep.

[Michael P]

Why be good? Because the alternative is being an asshole.

Seriously, it's not that difficult a question. The only thing you have to ask yourself is if you are willing to be the cosmic equivalent of the guy at the concert wearing the band's T-shirt.

[Dom]

I'd like to answer, but I am not ordinary.

You mom told me I'm special.

[jimmyboy]

What am I ignoring? Where does it say in the Bible that if we sin we're going to go to hell?
Revelation 20:8:
"But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

Pretty clearly stated there. Also, in John 3 Jesus says that
"18 He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."

So if you simply do not believe, you are condemned already.

[Fenris]

To clarify, I do believe in altruism and try to practice it as often as feasible. For example, when I buy stamps, I get them from the machine with a $20 bill, and save those dollar coins to give away to homeless people. I do this because I've been blessed with ability and a good education and a wonderful spouse. Others aren't so lucky, so I do what I can to help them. I do this because it makes me feel good to do it. That's what altruism is, doing good without expectation of external reward. The reward comes from inside.

There are some people whose internal sense of duty is so strong that they'll actively sacrifice their own personal needs for those of others. Ordinary people who actively attempt to do good without expecting anything in return except for the satisfaction that comes from having done good, having done what is necessary, having done something that nobody else was willing to do. I've known some people like this, I've known real heroes.

That I believe the psychological mechanism involved is essentially selfish doesn't mean that I don't celebrate the great accomplishments of such people, that I don't celebrate the little everyday kindnesses people do for each other. I do. I believe in morals, in good and evil, in right and wrong, and I admire those who choose to do right.

The psychological event- the satisfaction- is certainly within your own mind, because... well, where else could you feel it?

But it seems like a misstatement to call an altruistic satisfaction "selfish" on that ground. Would you say that mathematics was selfish, because people doing math are pursuing the rational sense of correctness within their own minds?

I guess what I'm saying is this: if every mental event is selfish, then the word "selfish" doesn't mean anything. It makes more sense to reserve the word for mental events that are actually focused on oneself, and not apply it to mental events that are focused on others.

õ
Or have I missed your meaning?

[Pól Rua]

Well, Dox doesn't, but that's because of the incident with the metermaid and the chimpanzee.

I resemble that remark!
'Dox IS good. He shares his metermaids.
*nods sagely*

[Paul McEnery]

The psychological event- the satisfaction- is certainly within your own mind, because... well, where else could you feel it?

But it seems like a misstatement to call an altruistic satisfaction "selfish" on that ground. Would you say that mathematics was selfish, because people doing math are pursuing the rational sense of correctness within their own minds?

I guess what I'm saying is this: if every mental event is selfish, then the word "selfish" doesn't mean anything. It makes more sense to reserve the word for mental events that are actually focused on oneself, and not apply it to mental events that are focused on others.

õ
Or have I missed your meaning?

Hmm.

I tend to think that altruism is selfish because, mostly, it comes from the fact that other people's discomfort distresses us -- in a very physical way. Turns out that we literally feel other people's pain -- it sets off the same alarm bells in our brain as when we ourselves feel pain.

The question is: what do we do to ourselves when we ignore that alarm bell? And what do we do to ourselves when we open ourselves up to it?

[Fenris]

Hmm.

I tend to think that altruism is selfish because, mostly, it comes from the fact that other people's discomfort distresses us -- in a very physical way. Turns out that we literally feel other people's pain -- it sets off the same alarm bells in our brain as when we ourselves feel pain.

That's neat!

But, again, I don't see how this distinction is relevant. We have a modeling system in our minds that mimics other people's pain. It is true, the pain we're feeling is in the model, not some telepathic direct perception of their pain; but so what?

That's like saying that the moon only exists in your mind; because you're not really seeing the moon, you're just seeing your internal representation of it, and that means that it's really all about you.

No. Your model is probably pretty valid. The moon is up there.

And if you have a model of someone else's pain, it makes no sense to say that the model makes you selfish. It's unselfish precisely because the model is not about you.


The question is: what do we do to ourselves when we ignore that alarm bell? And what do we do to ourselves when we open ourselves up to it?

We exercise the power to define ourselves. One way or the other.

õ
To the extent that we can!

[Deathlok]

I choose to volunteer because there is enough sadness in the world & I cannot save the world. But I can choose to do my part to make my part of the world alittle better place to live for those less fortunate than I.

[J Dog]

Let me put it this way:

Good people are good since the only thing Hell is for is congressmen, terrorists, and freaks. Nobody wants to have a drink with those scum.

I try to be good, but in my life, there are enough idiots to make me grab a rifle and blast brains. For example, I have this bitch of an english teacher who I want to get after.

However, unless you live in the Viking system, where you can kill people if you think they deserve (according to Scott Adams), throwing a 67 year old bat out of a third-story window and onto a heater dosen't cut it. Doing so violates all laws, and guess what? You're hell bound!

The only quirk with the decision thing is that to get to heaven you must waste your life away doing good (help old ladies, not swear, resist urges to lash out, etc.). WHY do the bad things make you feel so good? I just want to go out, grab a set of keys, and throw golf clubs at people.

[Gumbo Maximillian]

That's neat!

But, again, I don't see how this distinction is relevant. We have a modeling system in our minds that mimics other people's pain. It is true, the pain we're feeling is in the model, not some telepathic direct perception of their pain; but so what?

That's like saying that the moon only exists in your mind; because you're not really seeing the moon, you're just seeing your internal representation of it, and that means that it's really all about you.

No. Your model is probably pretty valid. The moon is up there.

And if you have a model of someone else's pain, it makes no sense to say that the model makes you selfish. It's unselfish precisely because the model is not about you.




We exercise the power to define ourselves. One way or the other.

õ
To the extent that we can!

I think the idea of what Gilda is trying to say is; if the only reason you are helping others is because it is causing "you" pain to see them in pain and not simply because people in pain need help or some such thing.

Then technically you aren't doing it for them, your doing it for you, to ease "your" pain.

Its like doing something more out of guilt than actual morality.

[Rabid Trekkie]

Before asking why superheroes are moral, perhaps it might be instructive to ask why ordinary people are good. Is it fear of imprisonment, or religious reasons, or something else?

For me, fear of imprisonment. I'm a Christian, but I was told that my sins are forgiven if I ask for forgiveness, so it isn't that. It's also that I'm afraid if I offend someone, they might come back and get me for it later. Unfortunately, that's also the reason I don't want to serve on a jury.

Also, I don't want to hurt other people because I've been hurt by others myself, and I know what it's like. I find that it's no good to hold on to grudges forever, but by all means hold on to them at least a little while. You shouldn't allow people to just walk all over you. Forgive them eventually, just not right away.

I'm good mostly because I've had good influences in my life. When I was young and didn't grasp all the religious morals, I had my cartoons and tv shows that showed people doing the right thing. My Dad told me stories from books he had read about superheroes and heroes from "long ago" (I was the only first grader who knew that Hercules saved people from a big dragon) as well as the simple version of Bible stories. As I've grown I understand my religion better which reinforces what my parents told me, and I keep the same media influences I had as a kid around me.

So pretty much what I'm saying is if you raise your kid on Jesus, Star Trek, and Batman they will become a pretty good person.

[Gilda Dent]

The psychological event- the satisfaction- is certainly within your own mind, because... well, where else could you feel it?

What I meant was that it is the psychological event that occurs in the actor's mind that is the proximate cause of good behavior, just as it is with all behavior. People act based on what is best for their own immediate psychological and physical needs.

But it seems like a misstatement to call an altruistic satisfaction "selfish" on that ground.

I disagree. Seeing another person in distress creates a psychologicals state of distress is some observers. Depending upon the degree to which one's experience allows one to identify with the object, we call this psychological state sympathy or empathy. These are good things. When we act to relieve this distress, or when we act because it makes us feel better, we call that altruism. Without the intervening distress or motivating desire to feel the satisfaction or pleasure that comes from helping others, no altruististic act occurs. Thus, I believe that the internal psychological event is the primary, or proximate motivating factor.

Would you say that mathematics was selfish, because people doing math are pursuing the rational sense of correctness within their own minds?

Mathematics is cognition, which operates differently from affect. Cognitive events operate differently from affective ones. However, there is a selfish element to this. Why are you trying to solve the math problem? For me, it's usually because I want to know the answer, and knowing the answer fulfills that curiosity, gives me a sense of knowledge, a feeling of power. Those are pleasant things.

I guess what I'm saying is this: if every mental event is selfish, then the word "selfish" doesn't mean anything. It makes more sense to reserve the word for mental events that are actually focused on oneself, and not apply it to mental events that are focused on others.

Only if we don't distinguish between internal psychological states and actions. Helping others without expectation of external reward is a selfless act, even if there is a selfish internal psychological motivation.

I'd like to emphasize that I celebrate people who do good things for others, personal sacrifice in service to the greater good. The question wasn't whether these things are positive things, it was why people do them, why people help others. I proposed a psychological mechanism that in a very broad sense explains how people can be motivated to do good things for others that seem to have no benefit to themselves. The benefit is internal.

Gilda