↖ Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?' What do you have to do to be a good person?I define a good person as someone whose behavior does not interfere with the good functioning of the group. If we have also been privileged, if we are aware of it, and if we feel a moral duty to give something back to the community, then we become a very good person. In fact, we thus activate a virtuous loop: I give, and as others also give, I receive. The difficulty at this level is to go from - I give to receive, and if I don't receive I am frustrated - to - I give because I feel privileged in the absolute of not living in misery or poverty. oppression, and if even more I receive, then I feel additional gratitude towards providence -. Why did you choose 'not to oppose the facts', and not 'not to harm others', to characterize someone as good?Let us begin by observing that when an individual or group seriously harms others, we almost always find a belief, which serves to exempt oneself from moral responsibility, contradicted by facts which are ignored.
So, in the end, if one does not oppose the facts, the belief falls, and the harm to others stops. In other words, not opposing the facts is a sufficient condition to put an end to the nuisance. 'Do no harm to others' is an expected result. 'Don't oppose the facts' is one way to do this. In other words, the famous phrase 'the freedom of some ends where that of others begins' is wishful thinking. Practice shows that some can trample on the freedom of others without even realizing it, as long as the beliefs on which they rely are not called into question, and therefore the facts which contradict them are ignored. Let us therefore simply remember that the capacity for harm of a non-psychotic individual corresponds roughly to his capacity to lie to himself. The cultural sources of this lie to oneself are religious, social and family beliefs, more widely developed and maintained in individuals with psychopathic tendencies. Why is it difficult not to object to the facts?Most people believe they are rational, and therefore not opposed to the facts. This belief generally reveals that they are unaware of the dreaded effects of cognitive dissonance that we have just talked about, and in particular lying to oneself. Indeed, cognitive dissonance, as described in the book A theory of cognitive dissonance de Léon Festinger, nous montre que quand un fait s'oppose à une croyance, c'est rarement le fait que nous privilégions. Dès lors, le mensonge à soi même se met progressivement mais inéluctablement en place, pour préserver la bonne image que nous avons de nous. Or le mensonge à soi même conduit à finir par s'opposer aux faits sans même en avoir conscience. Il existe donc un cercle vicieux entre s'opposer aux faits et se mentir à soi même. Le second est à la fois le produit du premier, et son facilitateur. The price to pay for not opposing the factsMost social groups are united by shared beliefs. To question these beliefs is to compromise one's belonging to the group, and therefore take the risk of social decline. Many individuals think they are smart enough to be able to play a double game at this level: pretending to believe in it to ensure their good integration into the group, and therefore optimize their success in life, while remaining rational, it is up to say not denying the facts. However, in his book A theory of cognitive dissonance, Léon Festinger shows us, supported by scientific experiments, that it is enough for the group not to exercise an explicit and strong threat for the individual who does not oppose to end up believing in it. Plus difficile encore : appliquer le règlement quand il est clair que le bon sens recommande de ne pas l'appliquer dans ce cas particulier, c'est s'opposer aux faits. Or ne pas appliquer le règlement, c'est prendre un risque social personnel important. Il est donc facile d'être un bon petit soldat, mais difficile d'être quelqu'un de bien. Personal indicatorAt the level of the question 'How to succeed in life', we talked about 'Don't pretend' as an indicator that we are on the right track. Respect for facts and respect for others are the same thingWhat is opposed, both to respect for the facts and to respect for others, is the ego (here social ambition or what we want) which prevails over reason. CitationsHenri Poincaré Le libre examen en matière scientifique, 1909 : « La pensée ne doit jamais se soumettre, ni à un dogme, ni à un parti, ni à une passion, ni à un intérêt, ni à une idée préconçue, ni à quoi que ce soit, si ce n'est aux faits eux-mêmes; parce que, pour elle, se soumettre, ce serait cesser d'exister. » ↣ Le libre examen en matière scientifique Go deeperFirst see the question 'Why do you need to control your ego?' which presents the other way of approaching the subject. Lire le livre A theory of cognitive dissonance de Léon Festinger pour comprendre ce que sont précisément la dissonance cognitive et ses effets, et plus particulièrement les chapitres 4 et 5 'Effets de la soumission forcée'. Lire éventuellement Krishnamurti. Se débarrasser des croyances, pour observer objectivement les faits, est le point central de son enseignement.
|