If you don’t agree with the concept of good or bad people, you dont have to answer just down vote. If you think a person is good or bad based on where they were born and live you don’t have to answer just down vote.
The book “Sapiens” does a good job framing this. Humans are social creatures. Our social groups define their own norms, mores, values, etc. To be “good” is to align with those values. Clashes happen when groups with vastly different values interact. The old adage “if you were born where they were born, and you were raised how they were raised, then you would believe what they believe” applies here, even though this isn’t always true.
The Internet makes this problem more stark. Our groups aren’t based on location anymore; our neighborhood, our school, our church. We can find our group(s) that align with and reinforce us any time we want. It’s also upset the typical way we define our values, and our society is struggling to catch up.
So long way of saying, good or bad relies on context and the values of those you’re close with.
But fuck people who don’t return their shopping cart. They’re just plain bad.
Removed by mod
Everybody has the capacity to be an asshole once in a while. To asshole is human.
But in general, people who go out of their way to stir shit up, or be an asshole/intentionally rude about something, then play the victim when they get called out for being an asshole. Waste of fucking space and energy. Just go live on a fucking island with all the other passive aggressive assholes.
How do they treat those that are “beneath” them? Customer service workers, pets, kids, etc. Anyone that they should have some sort of authority over.
Removed by mod
In addition, how quick they are to declare others to be beneath them.
That’s definitely a big one for me.
This and the shopping cart test tells you a lot about a person.
If they harm other people, intentionally or not, physically, emotionally, etc. And they could stop but choose not to, then often they are a bad person.
Fair
Easy. By what they say and do.
I assume everyone is good by default, and I’ll usually let a tasteless joke slide once, because we all occasionally put our foot in mouth.
If their actions and words don’t mesh with my own moral compass, they aren’t a person I associate with any more than necessary.
Id agree
Although philosophers who embrace moral realism will have different views, my takeaway is that it is much harder to be a virtuous moral agent than the layperson assumes.
That said, if I find that a person often puts their own interests above those of everyone else, this is a good indication of questionable character.
Removed by mod
Ha! In a few ways, yes.
This is why everyone hates moral philosophy professors
It’s not all or nothing, and small things are universally tolerable. Gluttony isn’t good but most people have someone fat/obese they love and even admire. Excess vanity isn’t good but to a certain degree most women are somewhat vain and that doesn’t make them bad (and men enjoy looking at women when they’re done up too), right? It’s impossible to be perfect, and virtue will be disregarded at times, but I think it’s not that difficult to be above the threshold we all naturally understand (unless you’re an amoral perspectivist): don’t lie, don’t cheat, don’t be coercive or aggressive, don’t mistreat others, take your vows seriously (raise your kids and try to make things work with your partner), be generous when possible, etc etc. And you can always repent and make amends when you fail too, people understand.
It’s impossible to be perfect, and virtue will be disregarded at times, but I think it’s not that difficult to be above the threshold we all naturally understand
This is a practical mindset to have but allow me to say more about where I think the difficulty lies. 1) We commonly do immoral things. 2) The right thing to do isn’t always clear. Let’s consider each in turn.
- Many practices are so commonplace in our time that we no longer feel their moral implications: even when we know that the action is wrong! For example, I eat meat that comes from factory farmed animals; I know that the animals are essentially being tortured, but it’s easy to let price and gustatory pleasure outweigh the moral considerations because everyone else is doing the same. Similarly, I know that the minerals (e.g., cobalt) used to build my cellphone come from literal slave labor of miners in the Congo. Yet instead of buying a Fair Phone, I bought the cheapest phone that served my own needs.
- There are also cases in which our virtues come into conflict. In such cases, the right action to take is not always so straight-forward. For example, is it okay to tell my wife a white lie if I know it makes her feel better? (Deontologists like Immanuel Kant would emphatically answer “no”.) Or, if I have a set amount of money to donate, should I give the money to a random unhoused person, donate the money to someone (who I cannot see) in an even worse position in a poorer country, or give the money to a friend/family? Moral realists (e.g., virtue ethicists, deontologists, consequentialists) all agree that there are definitive answers to these questions, even though they will disagree on what the actual answers are.
To be a morally virtuous persons, it seems you have to be willing to go against the common practices of your own time and you must also be knowledgeable enough to make correct moral judgements. This is a tall order for most of us to achieve.
That makes sense
Empathy
Yep. Real fucking easy answer for me.
If someone tells you a story about how they lost their dog, if that person tries to one-up them, dismiss them, or hurts them… They’re a bad person. No negotiation.
What if someone tells you a story of how they lost their spider?
I would be sad. I’m an arachnophobe, but Spiders are magnificent.
Spider warning
If they lie all the time, they are probably willing to do other awful things as well.
If they are willing to steal outside of a desperate situation, if they treat someone who’s been good to them awful, if they treat those beneath them awfuly, if they judge based on location, race, etnicity, etc. If they put whatever fantasy world they live in, over reality (antivaxxers and such, and yes religious people).
If they co-operated with Jeffrey Epstein, they only belong in the woodchipper.
I’d mostly agree but would need to hear more about your view on religious people I guess.
Antivaxx mom let’s baby die of mumps, because God wanted us to live (and die) natural lives, India citizen drinks infected, dirty lake water, because “holy water can’t be dirty”.
Ok, so you found some way to cope with life, and you believe in some deity or whatever, that’s a you thing. But then, you start getting people killed over what is a belief, when you can clearly see with your own eyes that it is not working.
Was it really worth it?
It’s all about empathy. If they lack empathy or kindness then fuck them. I don’t want them in my life and I prefer not to interact with them.
Thats fair
Ocular patdown
Always hit em with an ocular pat down
Their ability to return their shopping cart to the corral
Small addition: while nobody is watching. Or at least they think nobody is watching.
The true litmus test.
Cart NARCS will forever live in my mind rent free
Louis Rossman had a video years ago that really got me looking at people differently. An obvious sign for him is how they treat animals. animals sadly are often the ultimate litmus test for ones morality. I find that respecting an animal, its boundries and its emotions is a thing only possible when youve developed a (imo) basic sense of empathy, that for pets and animals cant be expressed verbally.
Think of times when a person was trying to force an animals to behave in a particular way purely for self intrest. Or if someone you know outright denies the complex emotions of animals. I am by no means an animal rights activist and i often can be heard yelling at my dog to stop barking or etc. But i think even if we “own” them most good people dont think of pets as propperty, status symbols, or entertainment.
the moment i see behavior like this I try to correct and if they actively fight me on it or make no attempt to improve. I will disconnect from them entirely, not worth it. If thats how you treat family, i dont want to see how you treat friends.
One of my tests as I’ve grown older is whether or not that person is capable of treating someone else’s children as their own.
Both my father and step father did, so I didn’t realize how rare of an attribute this is, nor did I realize how evil not having this attribute can make some seemingly good people behave.
If society was only copies of this person, would it be better or worse to live in than current society?
Oh no, my puddle of depression is gonna become a tsunami of depression.
A society of "me"s is cooked. Unable to do anything because its too scary to go outside.
The worst thing you’ll run into is another depressed puddle. Can’t be too bad unless you’re something like a reckless driver because nothing matters.
Yeah but you’re not raping and murdering and lying and scamming so perhaps it wouldn’t be a very productive society but at least we’d be safe with a society of yous. 🤷😁
Thats an interesting way to look at it!
