I've been doing a lot of thinking lately. Don't laugh, it happens.
Anyway, the bottom line here is that I am curious to know which single
virtue people respect most in other people.
Please tell me the top quality (or two if you're brief... I don't want to
hear from you at all if you're boxers) you admire and/or respect the most
in someone and why you feel as strongly about it as you do. For instance,
if your pick is open-mindedness, try to describe exactly what you think
"open mindedness" is. Many of us have different ideas about what these
terms mean and, for altogether too many people, the term "open mindedness"
simply means the ability for someone else to see things your way. I want
to know how you are using the term and why you feel it is a positive
quality in all circumstances.
I'll more than likely grill you about your choices and introduce
hypothetical circumstances, so be prepared to defend your pick. For
instance, if you decide that you most admire selflessness, I would suggest
that in many cases, selflessness can hurt the selfless person and actually
comes from poor self esteem... which, in those cases, would technically
make it a vice.
I appreciate your help.
~M.
____________________ "I believe that woman is planning to shoot me again."
Alugarde
Member
Posts: 185 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 6/6/2004 at 01:13 AM
If I had to narrow it down, I'd say there are two qualities I value,
appreciate, and respect most.
The first is Compassion. I never really put a definition of "Compassion"
into words. I suppose I would describe it as the ability to empathize and
sympathize with another being's suffering, and, more importantly, to care
about that suffering enough to want to ease it.
The second quality I never really put a term onto. If I had to decide on a
term, I suppose I would choose "self-consideration". Simply put, someone
with this quality is one who has thought about their beliefs, considered
why the should believe the things they should, and rejected the beliefs
they think aren't right for them, rather than just accepting the beliefs
they were raised on or had handed to them.
____________________ l33t is the bastard cousin of contractions.
Squire-of-Gothos
Fanatic
Posts: 206 Registered: 1/1/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 6/6/2004 at 06:00 AM
Realism, and Idealism. Generally the two are never found together, but
those who can posses both simutaneously are the people I adore most. Hoping
for the best is fine, and living grounded is great, but being able to
dream, and hope, and reach out even though they know how fucked up things
are, is, admirable. And wonderful. Though pessimism is awsome, and anyone
who is witty, and I mean Dorothy FUCKING Parker witty, well, I love that as
well.
____________________ “The only thing that can alter the good writer is death.”
“You know that if I were reincarnated, I’d want to come back a buzzard.
Nothing hates him. He is never bothered or in danger, and he can eat
anything.”
Faulkner
Meranda_Jade
Fanatic
Posts: 511 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 6/6/2004 at 06:04 AM
There are a lot of virtues, and in every person, I can usually pick out
what virtues they have and like them for it. There is one that I value
above all else, however.
Honesty. I can respect anyone who is brutally honest with me. If someone
can tell me, "Hey, you really look like shit today." or "I really don't
care for you." they will have my respect. Things that people may say to me
might hurt a bit, but that's nothing compared to the hurt felt when someone
lies to me, cheats me or steals from me. I try to be as honest as possible
myself, lying hurts me... even when it would definitely be in my best
interests to lie about something, I tend not to do it. At most, I will
refrain from saying anything, but that seems a tad dishonest to me as well,
and I usually feel a lot of guilt about it. Most of the time I make sure
that I have no reason to lie about anything at all, by not doing things or
behaving in ways that would tempt me to lie.
There are a lot of virtues that I value in people, but that has to be the
one I most respect.
____________________
IamSquid
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 658 Registered: 27/5/2002 Status: Offline
posted on 6/6/2004 at 04:51 PM
Passion! People who put everything they have into something because they
feel it on a kind of Agape like level especially if it's so intense yoo
feel that very energy just by being in their presence. Whether they're
right or wrong, or whether they succeed or fail doesn't matter quite so
much as long as they're passionate about it.
Good topic, Mono.
____________________
i wanted to die, and then it progressed into wanting everyone else to
die so i could watch, and then me die.
I'm not sure what you would call this quality, but I truly honestly respect
people for these two traits.
First is when people are strong enough to be truly honest. Most
specifically, people who don't hide their mistakes hoping they'll get
overlooked only to cause a larger problem later, and can admit they're
wrong or that they messed up. If there is one thing I can't stand are
hopelessly idiotic people who have it in their mind how fabulous they are,
and when they mess up they simply can't understand how it could be THEIR
doing. I admire people that can look you in the face and say "man, I just
did something SO stupid, how do I fix it?", even if they might get in a
little trouble.
I also admire the trait of not passing off duties or chores to others when
you're capable of doing them yourself. I can't stand people who bully
their way into doing the "fun" things that they like to do (even if they're
not immediatly necessary) while just passing off more necessary jobs to
people around them.
I imagine that both those traits fall uder "integrity", but as with other
things, everyone seems to have an opinion on just what a certain term
means.
____________________ Trapped in time. Surrounded by evil. Low on gas.
Monolycus
Fanatic
Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 6/6/2004 at 11:20 PM
Sweetness. I wasn't expecting enough responses to get down and socratic
with, but you guys are rocking hard as usual. I'd tip my hat to you all if
I were wearing one. Let's see what we have to play with so far.
Alugarde: I disagree with none of what you outlined. I would call that
second quality that you referred to "introspection", and I admire it as
well.
Squire: Am I wrong to paraphrase you as saying that you respect the
ability to remain upbeat and well-grounded in the face of adversity? I'll
need a little bit more clarification here, and I apologise for having a
dense-as-plywood day.
M_J: I would have to say that honesty doesn't qualify in my book as a
virtue, although it can, from time to time, be a good quality. Truth (with
a capital letter) should always be Truth at all times and for all people,
otherwise the quality you are describing can not be called "virtuous", but
only beneficial in a particular instance. In this case, I can be both
honest and hurtful simultaneously. If I told a woman "You're fat, you're
ugly and I hate you", I may not necessarily be lying, however my comment
would be designed specifically to produce anguish in someone else. My
motive for being honest in such a case would be malicious. I can not see
how a genuine virtue could be inclusive with viciousness, and therefore
must conclude that honesty is a valueless quality... it's value being
contingent upon circumstance.
Squid: Similar to my problem with M_J's pick, I can see passion as having
both positive and negative applications. From all accounts, Reinhardt
Heydrich was pretty darned passionate about exterminating Jews, but very
few people could conclude that his passion improved him much as a human
being. Also, passion often stems from mania, which is an abnormal
condition and generally regarded as something in need of being corrected.
I can see how passion can be a positive trait in cases as well, but, I'm
afraid that there are too many conditions and caveats to be made for it to
qualify as a virtue.
Bettie: I would call the first trait you described "humility". And I agree
that the ability to admit when you are in error is a damned fine, and
damned rare, thing. Humility is often held up as a virtue, and I
understand the reasons for it, but I have a little bit of a problem with
that. Genuine humility is not an easy thing to achieve (Benjamin Franklin
once quipped that he would be very, very proud indeed if he were ever able
to manage being truly humble), however the semblance of it is fairly easy
to emulate.
The litmus test here for whether or not a thing is a virtue is whether or
not it improves a person (viz. makes them truly better, not necessarily
materially successful) to cultivate it. In the case of humility, I am
undecided. It most definitely has the potential to piss off people around
you. Two historic figures who are generally used as illustrations of
humility are Jesus Christ and Socrates. Whether they were truly humble or
only affecting humility is as open a question as to how much they were able
to benefit as human beings by cultivating it. What is not an open question
is how people around them responded to them... they were both killed by the
people around them who had simply had enough of their damned good
examples.
The second quality that you have described is something I would call
"personal responsibility". Another good pick which may also not be very
cut-and dried. A problem that occurs when people are hard working, do what
they ought, and generally take care of what needs to be taken care of is
that people around them foist more and more of their crap on to them
(Aesop's grasshopper didn't really freeze to death, he just spent the
winter sponging off the ant and his own wealthy relatives). As before,
though, it might not be fair to disqualify something from the category of
vituosity because third parties tend to behave badly. The degree of
benefit a person receives from being personally responsible is a very good
question.
Everyone: Great picks, really! I hadn't considered some of them and am
very impressed. Now that we have a bit of material to work with (and keep
throwing more on the pile!), the next question is: if you respect a virtue
in someone, have you deliberately tried to cultivate that quality in
yourself? Can't wait to hear! I am, as always,
your faithful servant,
~M.
____________________ "I believe that woman is planning to shoot me again."
IamSquid
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 658 Registered: 27/5/2002 Status: Offline
posted on 6/6/2004 at 11:55 PM
Reinhardt Heydrich was pretty darned passionate about exterminating
Jews
Hate is a bigger turn-off for mee than passion is a turn-on. I'm sure if
this is someone who radiated passion he would almost certainly radiate a
greater amount of hate.
very few people could conclude that his passion improved him much as a
human being.
That's sort of the thing about passion. It dosn't have to be directed
towards anything "productive." It's an emotional as well as intellectual
drive towards something.
Also, passion often stems from mania, which is an abnormal condition and
generally regarded as something in need of being corrected.
Genius and "madness" overlap so much that anyone who is just intelligent or
just "crazy" is the exception to the rule. Of course this is abnormal, if
everybody had it, the world would be a different place. Furthermore, if
everybody had it, it wouldnt be anything special.
I'm afraid that there are too many conditions and caveats to be made for
it to qualify as a virtue.
A warrior must make a choice and stand by it, even if along the way he
appears to be mistaken in his choice, it's better to see an incorrect
acttion through than to hesitate to act.
As for trying to cultivate passion within myself I would say it's not
something yoo can force. Yoo can't just wake-up and say "I think I'll be
passionate from now on." I have however tried to get myself into
situations that would either give mee experience to be passionate from or
bring out my passion. I haven't thought about this in a long time...
Alright, Mono, yor turn.
[Edited on 6/7/2004 by IamSquid]
____________________
i wanted to die, and then it progressed into wanting everyone else to
die so i could watch, and then me die.
-ickgirl
Starlight
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 618 Registered: 27/9/2002 Status: Offline
posted on 7/6/2004 at 12:00 AM
There are a great many traits and virtues that I can say I admire in those
who possess them. If I am to single out one virtue that I put high on my
admiration list, that would have to be Tact.
I've witnessed a lot of peole who believed they were being tactful, and in
my opinion ended up just being tacky. Tactfulness is an art form. It
requires a great deal of skill to choose the perfect angle to approach a
situation. Many can come close, but few can master the art fully.
In some ways, I equate tactfulness with gracefulness. The two often go hand
in hand.
In response to if I try to cultivate that virtue in myself, I try. I
respect the quality greatly, and while I don't necessarily try in every
circumstance, I do make an effort to strive to be more tactful.
____________________ "When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never
tried before." ~Mae West
Squire-of-Gothos
Fanatic
Posts: 206 Registered: 1/1/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 7/6/2004 at 07:42 AM
OH I'm all about being upbeat in the face of adversity. Though adversity is
a strong word, and brings to mind hunger strikes, fire hoses, and real
issues like segregation, and Knight Rider reruns. But sure. Conversly (And
oddly I might add) I also really dig pessimism, as long as it isn't "School
sucks, that cute guy who plays NIN covers doesn't want to fuck me again,
mommy won't buy me Hot Topic pants!" but more along the lines of a witty
sort of sardonic pessimism, that which one might find in Dorothy FUCKING
Parker, or the writers of Daria. And thusly, Prove once again that I really
don't have anything good to say on this site...
____________________ “The only thing that can alter the good writer is death.”
“You know that if I were reincarnated, I’d want to come back a buzzard.
Nothing hates him. He is never bothered or in danger, and he can eat
anything.”
Faulkner
Squire-of-Gothos
Fanatic
Posts: 206 Registered: 1/1/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 7/6/2004 at 07:48 AM
Oh and by the way, tact is the best one so far in my book! Honestly, it's a
very overlooked thing. Everyone is like "GOOD VERSUS EVIL, TRUTH, THE WILL
TO SURVIVE, SOCIAL VERITE DESPITE THE HUMAN CONDITION!" and then there's
tact. It's the introspective equivalent of going to Rodney's rootin'
tootin' Steak House and ordering a small, broiled piece of salmon, lightly
garnished with basil and lemon zest,with a side order of steamed egg plant.
Simple, ellegant, the small things can be the most beautiful, etc.
____________________ “The only thing that can alter the good writer is death.”
“You know that if I were reincarnated, I’d want to come back a
buzzard.
/>
Nothing hates him. He is never bothered or in danger, and he can eat
anything.”
Faulkner
Alugarde
Member
Posts: 185 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 7/6/2004 at 09:59 AM
quote:Bettie: I would call the
first trait you described "humility". And I agree that the ability to
admit when you are in error is a damned fine, and damned rare, thing.
Humility is often held up as a virtue, and I understand the reasons for it,
but I have a little bit of a problem with that. Genuine humility is not an
easy thing to achieve (Benjamin Franklin once quipped that he would be
very, very proud indeed if he were ever able to manage being truly humble),
however the semblance of it is fairly easy to emulate.
The litmus test here for whether or not a thing is a virtue is whether or
not it improves a person (viz. makes them truly better, not necessarily
materially successful) to cultivate it. In the case of humility, I am
undecided. It most definitely has the potential to piss off people around
you. Two historic figures who are generally used as illustrations of
humility are Jesus Christ and Socrates. Whether they were truly humble or
only affecting humility is as open a question as to how much they were able
to benefit as human beings by cultivating it. What is not an open question
is how people around them responded to them... they were both killed by the
people around them who had simply had enough of their damned good
examples.
Monolycus: To me there are two parts of humility the way Bettie described
it. The first is recognizing, admitting, and feeling remorseful over a
mistake. The second is wanting to correct it. I think both of them have
merit as virtues, and even if one is insincere about the first, I think
those who ask for help or advice generally are sincere in wanting that
help. The second part may be considered a seperate virtue in and of itself,
ift that helps in determining wether or not humility is a virtue.
As for cultivating virtues in myself, that is one of my goals in life. I
constantly try to improve myself, not only in my virtues but also in my
abilities.
____________________ l33t is the bastard cousin of contractions.
Devin
Administrator
Posts: 317 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Online
posted on 7/6/2004 at 11:19 AM
The thing that works for me isn't something there is a word for. It can
only be explained to people who posess these traits. Everyone else takes
it wrong, so it is better off not being explained so as to avoid people
twisting the meaning into something that appllies to them. I usually just
refer to it as being on the vibe - but that is probably not a good way to
refer to it, since dirt eating hippies are generally on the vibe too, even
though their brains are so melted that they eat dirt. I'm talking about
the spark of life that goes with being on the vibe and knowing it and
knowing what it means. It also means understanding the vibe, knowing what
it feels like and how to move it around. Basically all of these things
combine to make someone I can just look at and think "that person is one of
my people". If someone has that, I can forgive quite a few flaws.
Whatever this is, it can probably not be considered a virtue, since it only
exists when percieved by me (or someone else who values it). However it is
still at the very top of my list of admirable qualities.
____________________ So Sayeth Me
Monolycus
Fanatic
Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 8/6/2004 at 12:46 AM
Squid: Ah, the point-by-point format. I admire your efficiency. I'd
almost call that a virtue. Anyway, let's get to respondin'.
"Hate is a bigger turn-off for mee than passion is a turn-on. I'm sure
if this is someone who radiated passion he would almost certainly radiate a
greater amount of hate."
I'm not sure as I never met the man, although I heard he was quite the
intellectual and was deeply sensitive; he was a virtuoso violin player and
often wept during what, if one can believe the rumours, were astonishing
and moving performances. I would not presume to know what kind of a person
someone is, no matter how abominable one or another aspect of their life
might have been. It is not fashionable to put human faces on those we
loathe, and documentaries which have shown Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin or
Osama bin Laden as more than one-dimensional psychopaths tend to get
protested. I would also caution you not to fall into the logical trap of
saying things like "I can't stand people who are intolerant. I really hate
people who hate people. The worst people in the world are the judgemental
ones. I think that anyone who kills someone else should be put to death."
Although that line of thinking does make the U.S. one of the remaining
"civilised" nations to uphold the death penalty, it will really undermine
your internal consistency.
Genius and "madness" overlap so much that anyone who is just
intelligent or just "crazy" is the exception to the rule. Of course this is
abnormal, if everybody had it, the world would be a different place.
Furthermore, if everybody had it, it wouldnt be anything special.
I've also heard that said about genius and madness, but nobody has ever
bothered to explain to me what they mean by it. If you define madness as
"thinking in ways that are different from the majority", and you define
genius as "thinking in ways that are different than the majority", then you
have set that one up yourself. I've spoken to people I consider mad and
I've spoken with people I consider intellectually gifted, and I haven't had
any trouble distinguishing the two to my own satisfaction. It's also a
little tautological to suggest that something wouldn't be "special" if
everyone had it, but that is another problem with the application of
definitions. I think that life itself is pretty damned special, albeit as
common as dirt.
A warrior must make a choice and stand by it, even if along the way he
appears to be mistaken in his choice, it's better to see an incorrect
acttion through than to hesitate to act.
The current Presidential administration would certainly seem to agree with
that principle. From my perspective, though, I would suggest that if the
action is incorrect, than it would, by definition, be better not to act at
all. Then again, though, I am not a warrior. I'd recommend reading
Antigone. It was King Creon's inability to consider changing a poorly
thought-out policy that cost him his wife, son and kingdom. I'd list this
vice somewhere near Bettie's observation about people who are incapable of
admitting they are in error.
As for trying to cultivate passion within myself I would say it's not
something yoo can force. Yoo can't just wake-up and say "I think I'll be
passionate from now on." I have however tried to get myself into situations
that would either give mee experience to be passionate from or bring out my
passion. I haven't thought about this in a long time...
Possibly, possibly not. If one can believe some of the more adept mystical
sects like the Sufis, one can discipline one's mind to do whatever you want
with it. I agree that it would take some dedication, though.
I hope this is an adequate response and I apologise for my delay in getting
it to you. I am, as ever,
your faithful servant,
~M.
____________________ "I believe that woman is planning to shoot me again."
Monolycus
Fanatic
Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 8/6/2004 at 01:00 AM
And, some more respondin':
Starlight: Good pick, and I hadn't considered it. I've never been much of
a diplomat myself and can mention from experience that the absence of tact
has certainly not served me well. I think if I were to codify it into a
sytem, it would fall somewhere under "social temperance". My comments
shouldn't have to be moderated from without; I should be grown up enough
not to screw my own self up with others. Thanks for bringing that one to
the table!
Squire: You seem to have plenty of value to say on this site; but, like
everyone else, there is some chaff with the wheat. Don't fret about it,
just work at minimising the chaff as best you are able. Anyway, you
mentioned the word "sardonic", which brings me closer to thinking that what
you are describing is a sense of humour. Am I (still) wrong?
Alugarde: Good catch. The sincere desire to improve oneself is a
qualitatively different kind of humility than the scraping, abject
simpering of someone who just has a low self-esteem. I would definitely
say one is preferable to the other. That could very well qualify as
virtuous.
Devin: The signal isn't always steady, but I'm tuned in to what you're
saying. Even though it's too subjective for me to be able to dissect it
the way I could other qualities, it is internally consistent enough to
qualify as virtuous for the person who recognises it. And it might just
explain why I never see you dropping in to some of my favourite dirt
cafes.
~M.
____________________ "I believe that woman is planning to shoot me again."
IamSquid
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 658 Registered: 27/5/2002 Status: Offline
posted on 8/6/2004 at 02:44 AM
It is not fashionable to put human faces on those we loathe, and
documentaries which have shown Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin or Osama bin
Laden as more than one-dimensional psychopaths tend to get
protested.
This is definatly true, Hitler was a vegetarian whose dog was his best
friend. People are just people. Even genocidal dictators. But if yor
agrument is that yoo cannot judge someone's character wihtout meeting them
(somehting I agree wiht to an extent) then saying someone like Eichman was
passionate about throwing Jews in the oven is not a viable
argument.
I would also caution you not to fall into the logical trap of saying
things like "I can't stand people who are intolerant. I really hate people
who hate people. The worst people in the world are the judgemental ones. I
think that anyone who kills someone else should be put to death."
I didn't, I said it's a quality I find unappealing in a person.
If you define madness as "thinking in ways that are different from the
majority", and you define genius as "thinking in ways that are different
than the majority", then you have set that one up yourself. I've spoken to
people I consider mad and I've spoken with people I consider intellectually
gifted, and I haven't had any trouble distinguishing the two to my own
satisfaction.
Actually I define genius as "thinking in ways that are different from the
majority which are productive to the individual's wellbeing" and madness as
"thinking in ways that are different from the majority which is
counter-productive to the indivual's wellbeing." For example the
self-destructive behavior that plagues musical legends, philosphers, poets,
painters, spiritual leaders, and serial killers. Once again, people are
just people and everything comes with desirable and undesirable
implications.
It's also a little tautological to suggest that something wouldn't be
"special" if everyone had it, but that is another problem with the
application of definitions. I think that life itself is pretty damned
special, albeit as common as dirt.
Do yoo have any idea how little dirt there is in the Universe?
The current Presidential administration would certainly seem to agree
with that principle.
Ouch! Actually, I don't think for a second they think they've made a
single mistake in anything they've done, but that is another argument.
I'd list this vice somewhere near Bettie's observation about people who
are incapable of admitting they are in error.
Touche! Hahaha!
Possibly, possibly not. If one can believe some of the more adept
mystical sects like the Sufis, one can discipline one's mind to do whatever
you want with it. I agree that it would take some dedication,
though.
Once again, touche. I'll reconsider my answer to that last question but
I'd like to add that although anyone may be able to learn something, some
are naturally prone to be better at it than others, and some can take it
further once learned than others.
Now come on, it's yor turn!
____________________
i wanted to die, and then it progressed into wanting everyone else
to
/>
die so i could watch, and then me die.
-ickgirl
callei
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 8/6/2004 at 08:00 AM
Mono I apologize now for this post.
"Do yoo have any idea how little dirt there is in the Universe?" is one of
the best lines i have read on here in awhile. Squid, you just got "spitting
coffee at the monitor" points off me.
As for virtues, I have to ask here, are we talking about individualistic
virtues or group virtues? It is implied that a virtue is something that
makes a person or social group happier, better able to function, and/or
doesn’t get them killed. So far the answers cover either groups or
individuals and I am wondering if there are virtues that work for both.
Some suggestions could be called ethics and some morals. And some are
clearly group oriented while others personally oriented.
As a social virtue, I would suggest curiosity since wondering “what happens
when we do this” is something that has resulted in a better, fuller life
for the people in the group (clan, family, tribe, country, chess club,
etc). I would even suggest that curiosity is part of what pulls a group
together and provides social cohesion. I am not pretending that one groups
curiosity makes life better for all groups, but then nothing makes
everything better for everyone. There is usually quite a few exceptions to
any rule.
As a personal virtue, I would suggest creativity. Being able to make
something, be it dinner or the great American novel, lets your mind roam
and play and romp and learn. I would suggest that it is something that
enriches the person’s private and public life, as well as enriching the
lives of those around them.
To lump them together, I would call them having an active mind with
curiosity being the cause and creativity being the effect.
____________________ Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and vampires
away.
Squire-of-Gothos
Fanatic
Posts: 206 Registered: 1/1/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 8/6/2004 at 06:10 PM
As far as I'm concerned, yeah Mono, you got me pegged. Did you know birds
can't burp? I didn't.
____________________ “The only thing that can alter the good writer is death.”
/>
“You know that if I were reincarnated, I’d want to come back a
buzzard.
/>
Nothing hates him. He is never bothered or in danger, and he can eat
/>
anything.”
Faulkner
IamSquid
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 658 Registered: 27/5/2002 Status: Offline
posted on 8/6/2004 at 06:39 PM
*takes a bow*
Thank yoo, I'm here all week. Pasta salad is now being served at the
buffet. Be sure to tip yor watiress.
____________________
i wanted to die, and then it progressed into wanting everyone else
to
/>
die so i could watch, and then me die.
-ickgirl
Monolycus
Fanatic
Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 8/6/2004 at 08:48 PM
Mmmm... smell the grey matter. Definitely diggin' it.
Squid: if yor agrument is that yoo cannot judge someone's character
wihtout meeting them (somehting I agree wiht to an extent) then saying
someone like Eichman was passionate about throwing Jews in the oven is not
a viable argument.
That deserves a tilt of the chapeau if anything ever did. While I used
Heydrich (the accredited chief architect of the so-called "Final Solution")
and not Eichmann (who, as far as I know was simply a pencil pusher) as my
example, you're observation stands and I bow deeply to your insight.
I didn't, I said it's a quality I find unappealing in a person.
I apologise for inadvertently putting words in your mouth, friend. I know
that you hadn't suggested those things, I was trying to be precautionary
and ended up obfuscating my meaning a bit. Thanks, as always, for your
patience.
Once again, people are just people and everything comes with desirable
and undesirable implications.
I am in perfect agreement with you on that point.
Do yoo have any idea how little dirt there is in the Universe?
I am very prepared to concede that point. And it's gotten me to thinking a
bit about the nature of what we find precious. You are a tough act to
follow, Squid.
Actually, I don't think for a second they think they've made a single
mistake in anything they've done, but that is another argument.
Has the potential for an interesting discussion. Another forum,
perhaps?
although anyone may be able to learn something, some are naturally
prone to be better at it than others, and some can take it further once
learned than others.
That may be so. I will grant that some have a greater initial
predisposition for things than others; I am not entirely sure, though,
about limitations upon what one can ultimately accomplish. You may very
well be correct.
callei: Mono I apologize now for this post.
No apologies are necessary as far as I can tell.
As for virtues, I have to ask here, are we talking about
individualistic virtues or group virtues? It is implied that a virtue is
something that makes a person or social group happier, better able to
function, and/or doesn’t get them killed. So far the answers cover either
groups or individuals and I am wondering if there are virtues that work for
both. Some suggestions could be called ethics and some morals. And some are
clearly group oriented while others personally oriented.
That's a very good question, actually. I was originally thinking only of
individuals as my question referred to characteristics that one admires in
another person, but you are absolutely correct to bring up the fact that a
society is nothing more than a collection of individuals. I don't see any
problem discussing both kinds of virtues as long as we keep track of which
ones we are talking about. I think there is some value in that
approach.
You proposed curiosity as a group virtue. I can see where you are coming
from with that, but I am thinking that, like M_J's suggestion about honesty
and Squid's suggestion about passion, there is the potential for negative
as well as positive consequences for a curious group. Therefore, I think
that curiosity would fall under one of those case-by-case qualities. This
is making me consider that, while honesty, passion and curiosity can not be
called "negative" or "undesirable" traits, but can have negative or
undesirable consequences, that perhaps "temperance" should be added to the
list of virtues. By this I mean the ability not to misuse those qualities
which, by themselves, are neither entirely positive or entirely
negative.
You also suggested creativity as a personal virtue, and I would agree if it
is expressive or artistic creativity. I have known some unscrupulous
people who have been pretty darned creative about causing suffering in
others, though. I think I understand what you are saying, but "creativity"
may be too blanket a term. I will have to think about it.
Squire: I had heard that about birds. One day, I will have to test that
idea.
~M.
____________________ "I believe that woman is planning to shoot me again."