NationStates Jolt Archive

so, I was out evangelizing today (no comments please) and I asked someone what they thought would happen when they died and they said "I am going to heaven" and I said "why?" and they said "because I am a good person, I mean I haven't killed anyone or anything"

so I am pretty sure that "not killing anyone" isn't the only requirement for being a "good person"

I am not really sure that being a "good person" is an objective measure, but hey, let's discuss it anyway.


**** I am NOT interested in a religious debate, this is purely a discussion of "where do you draw the line?"*****

So, are you a good person? why? what would make a good person bad?

Can anyone really be good?

Nope, we're all sinners under a vengeful God. No one can live up to the standards of a perfect being, so we're all consigned to hell.

Nope, we're all sinners under a vengeful God. No one can live up to the standards of a perfect being, so we're all consigned to hell.


**** I am NOT interested in a religious debate, this is purely a discussion of "where do you draw the line?"*****

in case you missed it.


If for example a friend died and you said "he was a good man" what would you mean by that?

is that more clear?

so, I was out evangelizing today (no comments please)

Asking for that in NS General? You out of your mind?

The last evangelical who knocked on my door suddenly understood what Hellfire meant - I introduced him to Mr. Flamethrower.

so, I was out evangelizing today (no comments please) and I asked someone what they thought would happen when they died and they said "I am going to heaven" and I said "why?" and they said "because I am a good person, I mean I haven't killed anyone or anything"

so I am pretty sure that "not killing anyone" isn't the only requirement for being a "good person"

I am not really sure that being a "good person" is an objective measure, but hey, let's discuss it anyway.


**** I am NOT interested in a religious debate, this is purely a discussion of "where do you draw the line?"*****

So, are you a good person? why? what would make a good person bad?

Can anyone really be good?
Good is relative...

I will help those who ask for help. I would also offer my assistance to those who look like they need help.

I have given my last dollar to beggers, I have also ignored beggers.

I have donated items to charity, I have also opted to sell items for money.

for me, the line is what can I live with and what can society accept as good.

No, it's truly impossible, and I'm not being a sarcastic douchebag this time. It's truth. People work out of a series of emotions that is called the Four Pillars of Thought:

-Pity (Also Mercy)
-Greed
-Fear
-Desire

People work out of one of these emotions all the time, and they do not come together to form good. For example, saving someone can be either Pity, Fear or Desire because:

A) They desire for the person to live
B) They desire a reward or recognition
C) The fear possible repurcussions for not helping
D) The 'pity' or have 'mercy' for the person and attempt to help

There is no good or bad. It's simply the extension on the work of these four basic emotions. For example, a boy is burning ants out of desire of wanting to see them burn because it gives him amusement. The opposite is that the boy does not want the ants to be harmed because he has mercy for them. They are both on the pillar, but both extremes, constituting into the thing you see now.

Pity is the sense of which you have mercy or wish to assist or work in some way to try and fix it, but only because you view down upon yourself because you are in a much better situation than the person.

Greed is the term of not wanting to change, keeping what you have and not wishing to coincide with outside rules on the terms of sharing and just distribution.

Fear is the uh...fear or consequences or even divine wrath (eg, Fear of Hell)

Desire is the need or want to do something or not do something usually based on the assumptions of the above conditions.

Hmmm...I have a buddy who is pretty religious-catholic..and we were talking about this.

I consider myself to be a good person. I dont really cheat/lie/steal/hurt..ect...and if I do I feel very bad. Even when I make fun of people who deserve it, I feel bad about it after, so I usually apologize.


I dont know what constitutes people in general as "good", I think its just something you (not you directly, but you in general) know.

There are certain (arguably) bad things I havnt done, even though I've had countless opportunities.

I dont know why, but I think its because of the "good".

Asking for that in NS General? You out of your mind?

The last evangelical who knocked on my door suddenly understood what Hellfire meant - I introduced him to Mr. Flamethrower.

Yeah...sure.:rolleyes:

Then you got arrested and got ass-raped by Bubba.

so, I was out evangelizing today (no comments please) and I asked someone what they thought would happen when they died and they said "I am going to heaven" and I said "why?" and they said "because I am a good person, I mean I haven't killed anyone or anything"

so I am pretty sure that "not killing anyone" isn't the only requirement for being a "good person"

I am not really sure that being a "good person" is an objective measure, but hey, let's discuss it anyway.


**** I am NOT interested in a religious debate, this is purely a discussion of "where do you draw the line?"*****

So, are you a good person? why? what would make a good person bad?

Can anyone really be good?


The most essential requirement for being a good person is empathy. Once you've put yourself in the other's place, it becomes harder to harm them. A good person may not be sympathetic but they are empathic.

Asking for that in NS General? You out of your mind?

The last evangelical who knocked on my door suddenly understood what Hellfire meant - I introduced him to Mr. Flamethrower.

I wasn't randomly knocking on doors if that helps, :)

Honestly, the Golden Rule sums it up best. Living with moderation, humility, and kindness is the easiest way to be a good person.

A good person is one who lives their life as much in harmony with the natural world as possible; that includes both human relations and the natural world because acting destructively towards nature is as great a wrong as hurting a person, especially when you consider that waste and destruction hurt everyone else who uses resources and will hurt those who come after you.

Also, belief is meaningless and action is everything; it doesn't matter what you believe as long as it leads you to do good...everything ultimately feeds back to the Way even if you don't acknowledge it as such. If faith truly mattered, there would not be the similarities in moral codes between so many beliefs, and those beliefs would not exist. Whatever you call it, they're all facets of the same ultimate truth.

It's difficult to say...there is no clear cut line.

I divide it into two categories...the "do" and "don't".
Don't is pretty clear. Don't kill. Don't steal. Don't lie. Don't cheat.

By keeping all those "don't"'s, you'll be a decent person.

To actually be a good person, you need to do the "do"'s...
give to charity. Help others. Volunteer. Care. Listen.

Again, they're pretty simple...but they make you a good person by taking the focus off of yourself and putting it on others to help them.

You may want to read about Socrates, who tried to separate the inherent attributes of a good person from the characteristics of a good person.

I'd say someone who has a fairly well developed moral code that considers others equally as him or her self. That person follows their own code to the best of his or her ability. And finally, does so not because of any attempt to be better or good'er than someone or for a reward of somekind, but because it's the right thing to do.

Good and bad are too subjective to be defined properly.

**** I am NOT interested in a religious debate, this is purely a discussion of "where do you draw the line?"*****


:rolleyes:

OK, fine, I would draw the line WAY over our heads. There's no such thing as a good person, we're all greedy, violent creatures. How's that? Even Gandhi and Mother Teresa must have fucked up at some point. No person can live up to the standards of goodness.


Out of curiosity, if you didn't want to talk about religion, why'd you make a thread devoted entirely to a theological concept?

The golden rule is usually best to go by in judging whether you are good or not. Usually, no one else has spent enough time observing your actions to pass judgement over you, so while your view on yourself is biased, theirs most likely isn't complete.

I would say that a good person is a person who does their best to love everybody. I don't think that there is a line you can draw and say "Everyone on this side of the line is good, everyone else is bad." It's a continuum, rather.

:rolleyes:

OK, fine, I would draw the line WAY over our heads. There's no such thing as a good person, we're all greedy, violent creatures. How's that? Even Gandhi and Mother Teresa must have fucked up at some point. No person can live up to the standards of goodness.


Out of curiosity, if you didn't want to talk about religion, why'd you make a thread devoted entirely to a theological concept?

good and bad are hardly limited to "theological" concepts.

so, I was out evangelizing today (no comments please) and I asked someone what they thought would happen when they died and they said "I am going to heaven" and I said "why?" and they said "because I am a good person, I mean I haven't killed anyone or anything"

so I am pretty sure that "not killing anyone" isn't the only requirement for being a "good person"

I am not really sure that being a "good person" is an objective measure, but hey, let's discuss it anyway.


**** I am NOT interested in a religious debate, this is purely a discussion of "where do you draw the line?"*****

So, are you a good person? why? what would make a good person bad?

Can anyone really be good?

I believe there's a good side to everyone. Yeah. No matter how evil they are.

:rolleyes:

OK, fine, I would draw the line WAY over our heads. There's no such thing as a good person, we're all greedy, violent creatures. How's that? Even Gandhi and Mother Teresa must have fucked up at some point. No person can live up to the standards of goodness.
alrighty then.


Out of curiosity, if you didn't want to talk about religion, why'd you make a thread devoted entirely to a theological concept?
I don't see it as purely a theological concept, it can be, but it can also be a social concept.

Good and bad? That's far too subjective to define.

OK, fine, I would draw the line WAY over our heads. There's no such thing as a good person, we're all greedy, violent creatures. How's that? Even Gandhi and Mother Teresa must have fucked up at some point. No person can live up to the standards of goodness.

Gandhi: Had sex with his wife while his father was dying.

Mother Theresa: Wanted Hinduists and Muslims to be baptized before they died.

Good and evil are purely subjective measures. There is no such thing as a "good" or "evil" person - human beings are made up of dichotomies and contraditions even when trying to follow our own rules of morality. It is impossible.

I don't see it as purely a theological concept, it can be, but it can also be a social concept.

No one can really be good within society, though, can they? I mean, basically, they either follow the laws, and support a constrictive, evil system, or they disobey the laws, and bring chaos and disharmony. They're both bad choices, and if you do neither (obey a few laws here and there, disobey others), you're not evil, but you're not good either.

Gandhi: Had sex with his wife while his father was dying.

Mother Theresa: Wanted Hinduists and Muslims to be baptized before they died.

Ah. Thank you.

No one is truly good. Everyone fucks up at least once, and often more than once.

What is important is that people try not to harm others. They won't succede, but by making an honest effort, they become as good as is possible.

A good person acts in a manner that grants the interests and feelings of others fair moral consideration. She may pursue her own aims, but she doesn't do so to the point where the interests of others are insignificant to her.

An evil person, by contrast, acts in a manner that prioritizes her own interests far above those of others, and is thus willing to mistreat others in order to attain her aims.

As for Heaven, there is no such thing; if there is, I hope we are all going there, whatever our moral status.

When people see some things as beautiful,
other things become ugly.
When people see some things as good,
other things become bad.

Being and non-being create each other.
Difficult and easy support each other.
Long and short define each other.
High and low depend on each other.
Before and after follow each other.

Therefore the Master
acts without doing anything
and teaches without saying anything.
Things arise and she lets them come;
things disappear and she lets them go.
She has but doesn't possess,
acts but doesn't expect.
When her work is done, she forgets it.
That is why it lasts forever.

...

The Tao doesn't take sides;
it gives birth to both good and evil.
The Master doesn't take sides;
she welcomes both saints and sinners.

The Tao is like a bellows:
it is empty yet infinitely capable.
The more you use it, the more it produces;
the more you talk of it, the less you understand.

Hold on to the center.

...

The supreme good is like water,
which nourishes all things without trying to.
It is content with the low places that people disdain.
Thus it is like the Tao.

In dwelling, live close to the ground.
In thinking, keep to the simple.
In conflict, be fair and generous.
In governing, don't try to control.
In work, do what you enjoy.
In family life, be completely present.

When you are content to be simply yourself
and don't compare or compete,
everybody will respect you.

...

A good traveler has no fixed plans
and is not intent upon arriving.
A good artist lets his intuition
lead him wherever it wants.
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts
and keeps his mind open to what is.

Thus the Master is available to all people
and doesn't reject anyone.
He is ready to use all situations
and doesn't waste anything.
This is called embodying the light.

What is a good man but a bad man's teacher?
What is a bad man but a good man's job?
If you don't understand this, you will get lost,
however intelligent you are.
It is the great secret.

...

When the Tao is lost, there is goodness.
When goodness is lost, there is morality.
When morality is lost, there is ritual.
Ritual is the husk of true faith,
the beginning of chaos.


Tao Te Ching, as translated by Stephen Mitchell, 1988

In other words:


Trying to promote "good" over "bad" (or vice versa) is pointless and futile; each is required to define and know the limits of the other (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yin_yang). Neither has any existance or meaning seperate or distinct from the other.
Truth, reality, that which is exists beyond "good" and "bad;" it is not defined by or characterized as being "good" or "bad."
The concepts of "good" and "bad" are abused in order to promote unnecessary competition and conflict which in turn distracts people from knowledge of reality, truth, that which is, etc.


(Edit: The question, then, isn't what one must do. Rather, the question is what should one not do? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu-wei)

A good person is someone who pursues their own happiness and allows others to pursue their own without any interference.
A bad person is someone who attempts to gain coercive control over another in any form.
Short, simple and philosophically viable.

I don't see it as purely a theological concept, it can be, but it can also be a social concept.In that case, things that destroy the social order, such as lies or murder, are bad, whereas anything that doesn't threaten social stability could be considered good.

In that case, things that destroy the social order, such as lies or murder, are bad, whereas anything that doesn't threaten social stability could be considered good.

I would suppose it would depend then on the definition of "things that threaten social stability"

A good person is someone who pursues their own happiness and allows others to pursue their own without any interference.
A bad person is someone who attempts to gain coercive control over another in any form.
Short, simple and philosophically viable.

Why does your post count say "N/A"?

Why does your post count say "N/A"?
Abandoning my post count and all the other trivial trappings of mortality (such as sigs and profile links) was the final step on my journey to Supreme NS Enlightenment. I am now the Eternal HNFVIII, unknowable and unpronouncable.
This, by the way, makes me supremely good and makes my answer to the question supremely correct.

Abandoning my post count and all the other trivial trappings of mortality (such as sigs and profile links) was the final step on my journey to Supreme NS Enlightenment. I am now the Eternal HNFVIII, unknowable and unpronouncable.
This, by the way, makes me supremely good and makes my answer to the question supremely correct.

*Bows, nearly blinded and deafened by close proximity to the NSZeneral Master*

Simple equation: Good = what you like, bad = what you don't like.

So, to be considered "good" a person would have to be someone you liked.

People seem to keep confusing good and perfect. Of course no one is perfect. But some people are good, surely?

I think the truly good people are the ones who do the right thing even when they don't want to. I'm not really a good person, because I do the right thing usually, but for me its also usually the easiest (or at least easier) thing to do. Its the sacrifice that makes an action truly good, i think. I mean, being kind to my friends doesnt make me good. Being kind to people who I don't like is what makes me good.

I'm not sure if this makes any sense. ugh.

I would suppose it would depend then on the definition of "things that threaten social stability"Well, things that would make society impossible if they were considered "good" or at the very least "acceptable". Think, if lying were considered moral or correct behavior, communication would be at risk. You could never tell if someone was speaking the truth, and in some cases, you depend on it. Likewise, if you could just kill someone because you felt like it, it would create a massive state of insecurity.

Abandoning my post count and all the other trivial trappings of mortality (such as sigs and profile links) was the final step on my journey to Supreme NS Enlightenment. I am now the Eternal HNFVIII, unknowable and unpronouncable.
This, by the way, makes me supremely good and makes my answer to the question supremely correct.Nah, I bet you're just paranoid.

I would suppose it would depend then on the definition of "things that threaten social stability"
actually, it would be the things that society will remember him/her for.

Rosa Parks threatened Social Stability... so did Martin Luther King Jr. then again so did Hitler, and many serial killers.

some hold Charles Manson and 'good' while others say the KKK is 'Good' but what it boils down to is each person's individual definition of Good. as More Individual's definition changes, then the image of said person/event will change.

for instance, If suddenly, a hidden bunker full of WMD's were discovered in the sands of Iraq, filled with papers signed by Saddam Hussein himself, then President Bush would have more people suddenly think that he is indeed "Good" and the Iraq War would suddenly change to being a "Good" thing

if one State let's up on their Homeland Security measures, the people may see this as a "Good" thing untill one flight blows up as it leaves that airport... then it becomes a "Bad" thing.

Relative and Perception... that is what makes things "Good" or otherwise.

Simple equation: Good = what you like, bad = what you don't like.

So, to be considered "good" a person would have to be someone you liked.

that's seriously the feeling I am getting.

that's seriously the feeling I am getting.

Well, good and bad ARE entirely subjective concepts. Something or someone can only be good if it benefits you, either directly or indirectly. Otherwise it is bad, or at best nuetral.

Simple equation: Good = what you like, bad = what you don't like.
Provided that by "you" you mean "H N Fiddlebottoms VIII" and not "the individual person making the judgements", then I think we might have found a winner.
In fact, that is the perfect way to do things, everyone can just come and ask me whether a particular action is good or bad, and I can proceed to judge for them based on my personal whims.
An example of my Supreme Ethics in action on a difficult question:
Disciple: HN! I have travelled for many miles to hear your words of wisdom. I am deeply in love with a woman, but I have recently discovered that she is my long lost half-sister. What should I do?
Fiddlebottoms: Well, that depends . . . What does she look like?
Disciple: Here is a picture of her
Fiddlebottoms: Yeah, I'd tap that, but first make her do something about her hair. That dye job makes it look like her head was just being used as a giant's tampon.

Provided that by "you" you mean "H N Fiddlebottoms VIII" and not "the individual person making the judgements", then I think we might have found a winner.
In fact, that is the perfect way to do things, everyone can just come and ask me whether a particular action is good or bad, and I can proceed to judge for them based on my personal whims.
An example of my Supreme Ethics in action on a difficult question:
Disciple: HN! I have travelled for many miles to hear your words of wisdom. I am deeply in love with a woman, but I have recently discovered that she is my long lost half-sister. What should I do?
Fiddlebottoms: Well, that depends . . . What does she look like?
Disciple: Here is a picture of her
Fiddlebottoms: Yeah, I'd tap that, but first make her do something about her hair. That dye job makes it look like her head was just being used as a giant's tampon.

Your relative perfection is subject to debate, especially in light of, well, me.

Something or someone can only be good if it benefits you, either directly or indirectly. Otherwise it is bad, or at best nuetral.

What do you mean by "benefits you"?

Your relative perfection is subject to debate, especially in light of, well, me.
How could you possibly be more perfect than I? Especially in light of the fact that the most perfect being in the Universe has deemed me to be most perfect being in the Universe? Think about that circular logic for a moment, and then consider the fact that circles are the most perfect shapes in the Universe, and so logic based on them must also be perfect.

How could you possibly be more perfect than I? Especially in light of the fact that the most perfect being in the Universe has deemed me to be most perfect being in the Universe? Think about that circular logic for a moment, and then consider the fact that circles are the most perfect shapes in the Universe, and so logic based on them must also be perfect.

Well, in the example you cited, you made a glaring, fatal error, rendering you imperfect..

Well, in the example you cited, you made a glaring, fatal error, rendering you imperfect..
You can't honestly expect me to tolerate her hair being in bright red dreadlocks, can you?
Anyway, I thought you Satanists were all about having a good time provided you don't stamp on too many toes. I mean its, not like she was his sister just, you know, half. Its even statistically possible that the two of them could have completely different sets of genes, making them practically strangers.

Generally speaking I would say that the relative goodness of a person is as seen externally rather than internally. A persons goodness can best be judged by others by noting how she treats others and what she does for others. A person could treat herself royally her whole life and consider herself above average in goodness yet be considered selfish and shallow by everyone else who cares. This puts goodness into the category of charity in which you do for others expecting no return save the goodwill and the respect of peers.

To be a good person you must first be set up well enough to be charitable. This does not always mean monjey or even much time, although these both are plusses. A kind word or giving your seat on a train to someone who needs it more are things a good person might do. But before a person will be good in either of these ways she must already have the nental tools and predisposition to do so. These include empathy enough to notice when someone needs a kind word or bus seat as well as a willingness to give when a need is seen.

So to recap, goodness is a complex set of behaviors in which a person helps others after the person is able.

As far as working on defining goodness goes, I have yet to find something more straightforward than the line from Chocolat:
Listen, here is what I think. I think we can't go around measuring our goodness by what we don't do, by what we deny ourselves, what we resist and who we exclude. I think we've got to measure goodness by what we embrace, what we create and who we include.


What defines a person's goodness is the causes they make, not the effects they experience. If one were to look at the lives of people that they consider good, most of them had really horrible things happen to them. What made them good people is the ability to rise above these horrible things.

No one is good. Sorry.

Romans 3:10: "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"

We only think we're good because we justify any negative outward actions and completely ignore how selfish we are internally.

Can anyone really be good?

Everyone is better with a little bit of salsa. :)

No one is good. Sorry.

Romans 3:10: "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"

We only think we're good because we justify any negative outward actions and completely ignore how selfish we are internally.
Again, this is not a theological debate, therefore religious texts are not valid evidence (if you wish to quote them and then support your point in other manners, that's ok).

And yes, it has been said several times already that everybody screws up sooner or later; everybody has flaws that make them human.

Everyone is better with a little bit of salsa. :)

I preferr ketchup.

Good is a mindset. There is no real set standards of what a good person is. Its all about point of view. I might think that someone that obeys all the laws, pays their taxes, and gives to charity as being good, but someone in another part of the world might think that someone that rebels against the gov't and fights is good. Its all about perspective. However, I do think that inside us all is an inherant trait that leads us to be compassionate and what is thought to be a good person, but might be drowned out by various social interactions.

A good heart. I believe there are inherently good people and bad people. Some of the worst are usually those that lead "squeaky clean" lives. Always putting up the front of being "fine upstanding" folk. But inside they are just ravening wolves.

[Originally Posted by Merasia View Post
No one is good. Sorry.

Romans 3:10: "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one" ]


Righteous means without sin. We have ALL sinned. Good does not equal righteous.

I would consider a person good if they were more selfless than selfish, if they put effort into improving the lives of people around them.

so, I was out evangelizing today (no comments please) and I asked someone what they thought would happen when they died and they said "I am going to heaven" and I said "why?" and they said "because I am a good person, I mean I haven't killed anyone or anything"

so I am pretty sure that "not killing anyone" isn't the only requirement for being a "good person"

I am not really sure that being a "good person" is an objective measure, but hey, let's discuss it anyway.


**** I am NOT interested in a religious debate, this is purely a discussion of "where do you draw the line?"*****

So, are you a good person? why? what would make a good person bad?

Can anyone really be good?

the girl that just left said i was good..does that count?

Personally, I don't believe in good or evil. I believe there are actions and ideas I like, and ones I dislike. The same applies to society.

By the judgements of some on here, I am a bad person: I take great pleasure in lying to friend and foe. By the judgements of others I am good: I am an active participant in charities and human rights groups. By my own judgement, I am, in my heart of hearts, a true hedonist

Their post count.