Let me start with a simple question. Do you want to be nice to others?
It depends!
Not so simple, after all... I'll rephrase. When you feel you want to be nice to someone, why is that?
You've said it already. It's because I want to.
Can we say that you are acting on your desire to be nice?
I wouldn't be nice, if I didn't want to. Wait... There are times when I feel I really don't want to, but I have to.
It's either you want to or you have to be nice. In both cases, if you don't manage to be so, you would feel bad.
Compassion, empathy, and altruism have roots in me-me-me. They are about yourself, at least partly, although they give you an impression as if they were all about others.
I knew you would go back to me-me-me! I am nice to others, because if not, I would feel bad about myself. Being nice to others is about fulfilling my desire to be so. But sometimes I'm not sure if I want to, say, put the biggest piece of cake on your plate instead of mine.
That's because you don't know if you want to be nice to me or not. Naturally, you find it difficult to act satisfactorily when you have an ill-defined goal.
It's easy to be nice to people whom you like.
Ah, is it one of your cough-cough, wink-wink, nudge-nudge?
It was a general statement.
Do you think it is possible to like someone who does not like you?
I didn't know that you have been dragging a dead horse with you today. It's quite old news, you know. It even has a name.
Are you thinking about unrequited love? The situation I have in mind is more generic.
If someone doesn't like me, it would be difficult to sustain favorable feelings for that person. After some time, I would label her/him as aloof, cold, distant, anti-social, strange, weird, stupid, idiot, moron...
You agree that when you like a person, that's usually also when s/he likes you. That means, barring perverse cases, you are nice to each other.
It's a chicken-or-egg problem. I like her/him, because s/he is nice to me, and because I like her/him, I am nice to her/him. That person would be feeling the same about me.
Another way of describing that situation is that you are nice to her/him, because you know s/he is going to be nice to you.
I don't do arithematics in relationships!
But you can't deny that you assume reciprocity. In fact, that is how relationships are maintained. Reciprocity also says that I will be nice to some people that I dislike, even detest, so as to avoid any potential harm they may inflict upon me.
I thought there was a minimum level of courtesy that we ought to observe under the name of dignity and respect for all.
If I apply biology to what you just said, minimum courtesy is motivated by self-protection, because consciously or unconsciously, we treat others in the way we want others to treat us. We are talking about the same thing.
What about unequal relationships, like the one between a serf-owner and a serf?
Even in such relationships, mutual respect is possible. But what would you do with people whom you do not know?
For all practical purposes, they do not exist.
You ignore them.
It comes down to that. How can I think about people whom I do not know?
What if you learn about starving babies in a faraway land?
Starving babies, again! Do I have a brother who has tragically turned into a Captain Hook, also known as Captaine Crochet and by some other names?
No brother this time. Would you help these babies, knowing that they would not be able to return the favor, in kind or even emotionally?
Tell me what the choices are. 50, 100, 500, and "Other"? You should specify the currency, too.
It is about civilization. I can make it sound less grandoise by saying urban sophistication, instead, because in the villages, everyone knows everyone else and almost all acts are based on reciprocity.
What does your civilization, oops, urban sophistication say, when faced with babies whom we don't know but happen to be starving?
Act with total strangers as if you had known them for a considerable length of time. Mind you, I do not mean giving up your purse or confessing everything about your life.
I know what you mean. An example would be a meaningful conversation with a person who sits next to you by chance at the bar.
That without delving into petty details and also without the intention to have any relationship after the conversation is over.
Or telling a joke to a person who stands behind you at the register.
That with the sole purpose of having a good time then and there.
All without expecting any positive consequence.
Nothing in the past or in the future, but treat the present as if there had been and would be something.
Instant trust without risking your wallet or life... But there are some people I don't want to mingle with, let alone look at.
That's natural and certainly there is no obligation to talk to every single person. In grossly simplified terms, I'd say civilization is about defying the limits of biology.
I'll match your contribution, how's that? Knowing you, it's going to be "Other," right? What I am not sure about is whether it's going to be 20 or 25.
It depends!
Not so simple, after all... I'll rephrase. When you feel you want to be nice to someone, why is that?
You've said it already. It's because I want to.
Can we say that you are acting on your desire to be nice?
I wouldn't be nice, if I didn't want to. Wait... There are times when I feel I really don't want to, but I have to.
It's either you want to or you have to be nice. In both cases, if you don't manage to be so, you would feel bad.
Compassion, empathy, and altruism have roots in me-me-me. They are about yourself, at least partly, although they give you an impression as if they were all about others.
I knew you would go back to me-me-me! I am nice to others, because if not, I would feel bad about myself. Being nice to others is about fulfilling my desire to be so. But sometimes I'm not sure if I want to, say, put the biggest piece of cake on your plate instead of mine.
That's because you don't know if you want to be nice to me or not. Naturally, you find it difficult to act satisfactorily when you have an ill-defined goal.
It's easy to be nice to people whom you like.
Ah, is it one of your cough-cough, wink-wink, nudge-nudge?
It was a general statement.
Do you think it is possible to like someone who does not like you?
I didn't know that you have been dragging a dead horse with you today. It's quite old news, you know. It even has a name.
Are you thinking about unrequited love? The situation I have in mind is more generic.
If someone doesn't like me, it would be difficult to sustain favorable feelings for that person. After some time, I would label her/him as aloof, cold, distant, anti-social, strange, weird, stupid, idiot, moron...
You agree that when you like a person, that's usually also when s/he likes you. That means, barring perverse cases, you are nice to each other.
It's a chicken-or-egg problem. I like her/him, because s/he is nice to me, and because I like her/him, I am nice to her/him. That person would be feeling the same about me.
Another way of describing that situation is that you are nice to her/him, because you know s/he is going to be nice to you.
I don't do arithematics in relationships!
But you can't deny that you assume reciprocity. In fact, that is how relationships are maintained. Reciprocity also says that I will be nice to some people that I dislike, even detest, so as to avoid any potential harm they may inflict upon me.
I thought there was a minimum level of courtesy that we ought to observe under the name of dignity and respect for all.
If I apply biology to what you just said, minimum courtesy is motivated by self-protection, because consciously or unconsciously, we treat others in the way we want others to treat us. We are talking about the same thing.
What about unequal relationships, like the one between a serf-owner and a serf?
Even in such relationships, mutual respect is possible. But what would you do with people whom you do not know?
For all practical purposes, they do not exist.
You ignore them.
It comes down to that. How can I think about people whom I do not know?
What if you learn about starving babies in a faraway land?
Starving babies, again! Do I have a brother who has tragically turned into a Captain Hook, also known as Captaine Crochet and by some other names?
No brother this time. Would you help these babies, knowing that they would not be able to return the favor, in kind or even emotionally?
Tell me what the choices are. 50, 100, 500, and "Other"? You should specify the currency, too.
It is about civilization. I can make it sound less grandoise by saying urban sophistication, instead, because in the villages, everyone knows everyone else and almost all acts are based on reciprocity.
What does your civilization, oops, urban sophistication say, when faced with babies whom we don't know but happen to be starving?
Act with total strangers as if you had known them for a considerable length of time. Mind you, I do not mean giving up your purse or confessing everything about your life.
I know what you mean. An example would be a meaningful conversation with a person who sits next to you by chance at the bar.
That without delving into petty details and also without the intention to have any relationship after the conversation is over.
Or telling a joke to a person who stands behind you at the register.
That with the sole purpose of having a good time then and there.
All without expecting any positive consequence.
Nothing in the past or in the future, but treat the present as if there had been and would be something.
Instant trust without risking your wallet or life... But there are some people I don't want to mingle with, let alone look at.
That's natural and certainly there is no obligation to talk to every single person. In grossly simplified terms, I'd say civilization is about defying the limits of biology.
I'll match your contribution, how's that? Knowing you, it's going to be "Other," right? What I am not sure about is whether it's going to be 20 or 25.
Posts
