What does it take to be a good person?I define a good person as someone whose behavior does not interfere with the proper functioning of the group. Si en plus on a été privilégié, que l'on en a conscience, et que l'on se sent le devoir moral de redonner quelque chose à la communauté, alors on devient quelqu'un de très bien. En effet, on active ainsi une boucle vertueuse : je donne, et comme d'autres donnent aussi, je reçois. La difficulté à ce niveau est de passer de - je donne pour recevoir, et si je ne reçois pas je suis frustré - à - je donne parce-que je me ressent privilégié dans l'absolu de ne pas vivre dans la misère ou l'oppression, et si encore en plus je reçois, alors j'éprouve un supplément de gratitude vis à vis de la providence -. Why did you choose 'not to oppose the facts', and not 'not to harm others', to characterize someone good?Let us note to begin with that when an individual or a 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 nuisance to others stops. 'Do no harm to others' is an expected outcome. Why is it difficult not to oppose the facts?Most people are persuaded to be rational, and therefore not to oppose the facts. The price to pay for not opposing the factsMost social groups are held together by shared beliefs. Many people think they are smart enough to be able to play a double game at this level: pretend to believe in it to ensure their proper integration into the group, and therefore optimize their success in life, while remaining rational, that is A theory of cognitive dissonance, Léon Festinger shows us, scientific experiments in support, that it is enough that the group does not exert an explicit and strong threat so that the individual who does not oppose is led to end up believing in it. More difficult still: to apply the regulation when it is clear that common sense recommends not to apply it in this particular case, it is to oppose the facts. Personal IndicatorOn the level of the question 'How to succeed in life', we evoked 'Not pretending' as an indicator that we are on the right track. Respect for facts, and respect for others, it's the same thingWhat opposes both respect for facts and respect for others is the ego (here social ambition or what one wants) which prevails over reason. DeepenVoir tout d'abord la question 'Pourquoi faut-il maîtriser son ego ?' qui présente l'autre manière d'aborder le sujet.
|