“Niceness” is largely performative. It’s based on words and little else. Being “nice” is based on how someone views themself.
Kindness, on the other hand, is rooted in an intrinsic belief that is shown through action. It extends beyond the individual and considers how their actions relate to society as a whole.
You can paint a layer of “nice” over an absolute garbage core personality. It doesn’t really mean anything. These days, “nice” can be used to describe a baseline level of standard civility that allows you to function in society. It says nothing about what kind of person you are.
I’m going to preface this statement by saying you don’t need to be a believer or religious to benefit from religious things, or musings of religious people. Your questions relate to philosophy, morality, virtue. These are things religions have pondered for centuries. Millenia. Perhaps we should at least consider what they have to say. I’m also going to preface this with…I think I misinterpreted your first question. But I like what I whipped up & I think you will, too, so I’m keeping it. 🙂
Pope Saint John Paul II once said, “freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought.” Now I really like this definition because it implies that real, lasting, quality freedom of the individual still comes with some responsibilities & even obligations. In the same way “being nice” is multi-faceted, it’s got layers to it, it’s using your freedom, abilities, powers, & assets to do good things for others. To build others up.
Now on to what I think your questions are, but I’m going to answer in reverse because I think it flows better in convo: there are absolutely huge differences between acting nice & actually being nice. A big one is motivation. Are you nice to help others? Or are you being nice in a bid to gain favor, look good, or get something for yourself? Are you altruistic & trying to help others? Or are you just in it for yourself? In Rick & Morty, I liked the wedding toast where Rick says being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets. Some people are nice just to help themselves.
We all have an opportunity to become better, or “be good”, and it doesn’t have to be anything earth-shattering. It’s the cumulative effect of making good choices, the right choices, every single day when we’re presented with the opportunity. Will Durant, when summarizing Aristotle’s philosophy, remarked, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.”
It’s hard to define “a point where someone stops being nice”; I don’t view humans as one-dimensional. It’s got to exist somewhere. I go back to a person’s focus & intention, some people are “not nice” on purpose & then I’m sure there are lots of people with glaring character flaws, who are themselves unaware and/or they don’t personally view those characteristics as flaws. “Being nice”, itself, is open to interpretation. Personally, I would define being nice (to others) as seeking out & prioritizing their needs, especially without obligation or compulsion. Maybe a person stops being nice when the bad is significant, or outweighs the good. Honestly this probably plays like the guy presented in comic, but I think different people can have different relationships with the same person. There’s a difference between a man & his boss, a man & his guy friends, a man & his wife, a man & his children, a man & idk people he doesn’t like. It’s the same guy. I think how a man treats somebody he owes nothing to says a lot about “niceness” & character.
Of the people I’ve encountered this is the more realistic portrayal of a racist. Granted, I’m white so have a hard time detecting when other whites are racist, but when they are it’s always in the more subtle ways of upholding and defending toxic hierarchies.
I’m sure there are plenty of people who will outwardly rant and rave, but I feel like those people lack the social power to be a real threat (though their lack the self control might make them a more immediate physical threat) .
I know people like this. They’re “nic”. But what that means is they put everyone they know into “one of the good ones” box. So they’re polite to all people they know, basically… It’s interesting and horrifying to see tbh
With enough self reflection, that can turn around into changing their opinion at a systemic level. Sometimes all it takes is few comments from someone they trust, and some time to process.
It’s like when people romanticise the old London gangsters and say they were polite and always looked after their mother. That still doesn’t make up for a lifetime of criminal intimidation, physical assault and murder.
If someone’s polite but just waiting for a local chapter of blackshirts to form they’re not nice people.
This is an interesting question. Given a sufficiently functional environment “Raymond” may be functionally harmless as its impossible to for him to have anything crazy he wants. In a functional enough one he wont even admit the crazy shit he believes because it would see him excluded and possibly fired.
Do we then consider him eccentric instead of a POS? Is a sex murder a “nice” if he’s behind bars and we only talk to him about normal stuff and forget that he would gladly rape and murder you without the bars?
At some point we need to understand that someone who would take away your rights and potentially kill you if you didn’t roll over and accept his dominion isn’t “nice” just because he exists in an environment where he isn’t in a position to work his will.
Good point. There’s plenty of examples (fictional or not) where ‘nice’ people were driven to ‘not nice’ things and vice versa.
The fact we need laws indicate that maybe mostly people are maybe not nice? Since if we’d be considerate we wouldn’t need those laws (in general)?
It seems most people seem to think ‘being nice’ is doing things the majority of people deem as a good thing to do.
You can believe really stupid shit, but still be a nice person, so that question probably has a grey zone that would be hard to qualify, withe several “dealbreakers” in there. Like, you can’t be a nice person if you want to own slaves.
Imo nice and kind are separate qualities, mutually exclusive. Raymond is unkind towards women, but he may have a nice demeanor. Lots of evil people can be nice around others in chit chat, but cruel in their actions and beliefs.
This is the entire concept of the gentlemen thief. Being polite, nice and honest in way stops someone from being an awful, terrible person who would gladly steal everything you own and leave you for dead.
People seem to struggle massively with the idea that others can be complex and multifaceted. Everyone whos “nice” must be good or everyone whos “mean” must be evil. Relly is just fundamentally flawed.
Everytime i see a comment saying they are confused over this it makes me feel like people just fundamentally do not understand the concepts of nuance or really other humans in general.
Never heard the term gentleman thief, that’s fun. I had Southern Hospitality in mind. A notorious stereotype is that southerners are nice but mean, and northerners are kind but rude.
I like this as a thought experiment: Lemmy, at what point does someone stop being nice? And is there a difference between acting or being nice?
“Niceness” is largely performative. It’s based on words and little else. Being “nice” is based on how someone views themself.
Kindness, on the other hand, is rooted in an intrinsic belief that is shown through action. It extends beyond the individual and considers how their actions relate to society as a whole.
You can paint a layer of “nice” over an absolute garbage core personality. It doesn’t really mean anything. These days, “nice” can be used to describe a baseline level of standard civility that allows you to function in society. It says nothing about what kind of person you are.
I’m going to preface this statement by saying you don’t need to be a believer or religious to benefit from religious things, or musings of religious people. Your questions relate to philosophy, morality, virtue. These are things religions have pondered for centuries. Millenia. Perhaps we should at least consider what they have to say. I’m also going to preface this with…I think I misinterpreted your first question. But I like what I whipped up & I think you will, too, so I’m keeping it. 🙂
Pope Saint John Paul II once said, “freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought.” Now I really like this definition because it implies that real, lasting, quality freedom of the individual still comes with some responsibilities & even obligations. In the same way “being nice” is multi-faceted, it’s got layers to it, it’s using your freedom, abilities, powers, & assets to do good things for others. To build others up.
Now on to what I think your questions are, but I’m going to answer in reverse because I think it flows better in convo: there are absolutely huge differences between acting nice & actually being nice. A big one is motivation. Are you nice to help others? Or are you being nice in a bid to gain favor, look good, or get something for yourself? Are you altruistic & trying to help others? Or are you just in it for yourself? In Rick & Morty, I liked the wedding toast where Rick says being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets. Some people are nice just to help themselves.
We all have an opportunity to become better, or “be good”, and it doesn’t have to be anything earth-shattering. It’s the cumulative effect of making good choices, the right choices, every single day when we’re presented with the opportunity. Will Durant, when summarizing Aristotle’s philosophy, remarked, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.”
It’s hard to define “a point where someone stops being nice”; I don’t view humans as one-dimensional. It’s got to exist somewhere. I go back to a person’s focus & intention, some people are “not nice” on purpose & then I’m sure there are lots of people with glaring character flaws, who are themselves unaware and/or they don’t personally view those characteristics as flaws. “Being nice”, itself, is open to interpretation. Personally, I would define being nice (to others) as seeking out & prioritizing their needs, especially without obligation or compulsion. Maybe a person stops being nice when the bad is significant, or outweighs the good. Honestly this probably plays like the guy presented in comic, but I think different people can have different relationships with the same person. There’s a difference between a man & his boss, a man & his guy friends, a man & his wife, a man & his children, a man & idk people he doesn’t like. It’s the same guy. I think how a man treats somebody he owes nothing to says a lot about “niceness” & character.
Raymond is probably “nice” to the fellow white dude, polite and not physically aggressive.
Raymond is not nice to society.
Could even be nice to the marginalized they know and deem “one of the good ones” but still vote violence against them and be racist pieces of shit.
I know people in this exact scenario, in fact.
Of the people I’ve encountered this is the more realistic portrayal of a racist. Granted, I’m white so have a hard time detecting when other whites are racist, but when they are it’s always in the more subtle ways of upholding and defending toxic hierarchies.
I’m sure there are plenty of people who will outwardly rant and rave, but I feel like those people lack the social power to be a real threat (though their lack the self control might make them a more immediate physical threat) .
I know people like this. They’re “nic”. But what that means is they put everyone they know into “one of the good ones” box. So they’re polite to all people they know, basically… It’s interesting and horrifying to see tbh
With enough self reflection, that can turn around into changing their opinion at a systemic level. Sometimes all it takes is few comments from someone they trust, and some time to process.
That’s an interesting point. People can be nice to certain groups of people I guess. Maybe no one can be nice to everyone.
I kniw that probably you didn’t mean it that way, but it sounds as though you’re excusing Raymond.
Nothing new here, who doesn’t know someone who is very pleasant on the surface and a complete sociopath underneath?
It’s like when people romanticise the old London gangsters and say they were polite and always looked after their mother. That still doesn’t make up for a lifetime of criminal intimidation, physical assault and murder.
If someone’s polite but just waiting for a local chapter of blackshirts to form they’re not nice people.
This is an interesting question. Given a sufficiently functional environment “Raymond” may be functionally harmless as its impossible to for him to have anything crazy he wants. In a functional enough one he wont even admit the crazy shit he believes because it would see him excluded and possibly fired.
Do we then consider him eccentric instead of a POS? Is a sex murder a “nice” if he’s behind bars and we only talk to him about normal stuff and forget that he would gladly rape and murder you without the bars?
At some point we need to understand that someone who would take away your rights and potentially kill you if you didn’t roll over and accept his dominion isn’t “nice” just because he exists in an environment where he isn’t in a position to work his will.
Good point. There’s plenty of examples (fictional or not) where ‘nice’ people were driven to ‘not nice’ things and vice versa. The fact we need laws indicate that maybe mostly people are maybe not nice? Since if we’d be considerate we wouldn’t need those laws (in general)? It seems most people seem to think ‘being nice’ is doing things the majority of people deem as a good thing to do.
Caleb!
You can believe really stupid shit, but still be a nice person, so that question probably has a grey zone that would be hard to qualify, withe several “dealbreakers” in there. Like, you can’t be a nice person if you want to own slaves.
And who decides what the “dealbreakers” are? The majority of society? God? Some king? Santa Claus?
Imo nice and kind are separate qualities, mutually exclusive. Raymond is unkind towards women, but he may have a nice demeanor. Lots of evil people can be nice around others in chit chat, but cruel in their actions and beliefs.
This is the entire concept of the gentlemen thief. Being polite, nice and honest in way stops someone from being an awful, terrible person who would gladly steal everything you own and leave you for dead.
People seem to struggle massively with the idea that others can be complex and multifaceted. Everyone whos “nice” must be good or everyone whos “mean” must be evil. Relly is just fundamentally flawed.
Everytime i see a comment saying they are confused over this it makes me feel like people just fundamentally do not understand the concepts of nuance or really other humans in general.
Never heard the term gentleman thief, that’s fun. I had Southern Hospitality in mind. A notorious stereotype is that southerners are nice but mean, and northerners are kind but rude.