I think that it's not that people are dumb or unmotivated; it's just that they're not Good people. As in, they don't actively care about being moral, don't think it's cool to spend time thinking about whether abstract actions are right, give in to temptation, etc. Of course, this is a generalization, but I think it's a fair one -- other people seem to be much meaner to each other than I am to anyone... I wouldn't say they're *dishonorable*. They simply rate their convenience higher than us and principles lower.
I once had a friend who said she lived her life 100% on the basis of principles. They weren't the same principles as mine, to be sure, but they were strong. My argument at the time was that one shouldn't do that, because sometimes the blow to convenience is just too big. I can't think of anything right now, but I know that there are borderline cases. And even if I can't think of any, it's important to leave the options open -- I may have to break a rule to save a life, possibly my own.
I think the crucial difference is one of intellectual curiosity, or more like whatever causes it, though I tend to lump them together. Some people care about abstract things, learning, thinking, analyzing, etc.; others spend that energy caring about the social world, which seems to us vapid because it involves not caring about those abstract things. Make sense?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-11 02:41 pm (UTC)I think that it's not that people are dumb or unmotivated; it's just that they're not Good people. As in, they don't actively care about being moral, don't think it's cool to spend time thinking about whether abstract actions are right, give in to temptation, etc. Of course, this is a generalization, but I think it's a fair one -- other people seem to be much meaner to each other than I am to anyone... I wouldn't say they're *dishonorable*. They simply rate their convenience higher than us and principles lower.
I once had a friend who said she lived her life 100% on the basis of principles. They weren't the same principles as mine, to be sure, but they were strong. My argument at the time was that one shouldn't do that, because sometimes the blow to convenience is just too big. I can't think of anything right now, but I know that there are borderline cases. And even if I can't think of any, it's important to leave the options open -- I may have to break a rule to save a life, possibly my own.
I think the crucial difference is one of intellectual curiosity, or more like whatever causes it, though I tend to lump them together. Some people care about abstract things, learning, thinking, analyzing, etc.; others spend that energy caring about the social world, which seems to us vapid because it involves not caring about those abstract things. Make sense?