Don’t be too harsh he’s a cool dude, but he unfortunately has some capitalism good musk good sentiments that I’ve been trying to dismantle for some time now and i thought I’d ask for help with this.
Or you can just dunk.
Don’t be too harsh he’s a cool dude, but he unfortunately has some capitalism good musk good sentiments that I’ve been trying to dismantle for some time now and i thought I’d ask for help with this.
Or you can just dunk.
I think it's fair to say that only 1% aren't arseholes and then the rest of us are on a sliding scale. I have moments of great altruism and then again I have moments of misanthropy. I think that's true of most of us. So yes, talking about good people or bad people kind of relies on a utilitarian measurement that is doomed to failure. It is however demonstrably true that there are some people who achieve the consistent levels of kindness that we wish we could maintain.
I think it's too moralizing to say that someone isn't a good person because they are unkind when they are at the very lowest point of their mental well-being. There's a difference between fairweather kindness, which is fair to hold some disdain for, and "having a breaking point eventually," which I think is generally called "being a human," even for that 1% you mention.
Yes, that's fair, I think. I was more saying that most of us don't fall neatly into either a good or bad category. I usually say I'm not good but I'm good enough - under most circumstances you will encounter a fairly even tempered and even kind individual but sometimes you will encounter a grumpy person who is not going to help you with whatever problem you have.
Far as this discussion goes I was using 'good' as a placeholder for "truly hardworking passionate, driven, disciplined, and motivated" because I didn't want to have to type it out since the origin was an image and I'm lazy enough not to want to keep typing that.