Defaulting to generosity - while operating with healthy boundaries - is by far the most beneficial mindset.
The alternatives are:
Victim. "I am too weak and poor to help anyone but I expect people to help me." This belief corrodes you.
Stoic(can't think of a better word.) "I don't help anyone and therefore I don't expect anyone to help me". Well, better than the victim but ends up passing up many opportunities where others are genuinely ready to help.
Abuser "I don't bother to help others but I take advantage of them" - becomes obvious very quickly and you are ostracized and hated.
Doormat "I help everyone but because I don't have healthy boundaries, I end up attracting abusers and victims." Gross.
The "best people" are clear and confident with their boundaries and generous with their time and resources when people are on the right side of the boundary. I see this a lot with truly successful senior managers and businesspeople, for example.
Even in politics, when a candidate runs for office, they want to tell stories of "X came to me and needed help and I really took the time to hear them and help them (kindness). Then Y came and they sought to rip us off and I told them to go fuck themselves (boundaries)." We seek that as species, we expect that out of the best among us, and therefore we reward those who operate from this place (and it's good for lots of other reasons.)
* where your boundaries lie along the spectrum from self-serving to doormat
* your propensity to be generous to people on the good side of your boundaries
I myself trend close to what you'd call a stoic. Probably out of fear of being a doormat. My boundaries are healthyish, but I don't quite trust them. So I don't seek out help from others, and in return I hope they don't ask for generosity from me. Being generous without crossing my boundaries is something I have to work on.
I know some narcissists who can actually be quite generous. This fools them into thinking, "There's no way I'm a narcissist!" because they can easily recall past instances of generosity. Yet they're still regarded by others as selfish. Their boundaries are shifted so far in their favor that they feel taxed being generous to others who most would deem worthy of generosity. And they expect sympathy, attention, and generosity in situations where most would not have that expectation.
These abusers often do end up ostracized, but that doesn't always look like solitude. They become victims, upset at their crummy relationships and unable to garner sympathy from others, yet unwilling to ever point the finger at themselves. Some end up alone, yes. Others befriend other victims who they can commiserate with, but those relationships don't last long for obvious reasons. So it's sort of a fleeting, on-again off-again ostracism.
Of course I'm speaking in generalities here. Plenty of victims aren't narcissists, etc. And I do have sympathy. Nobody chooses to be a narcissist. I think some people are just wired that way, or perhaps set on that course by environmental factors early in life. Either way, it's not a choice. So I think it's somewhat of a tragic condition.
My advice would be that if you're consistently getting negative feedback about your personality traits, take it seriously. It'll be tempting to deny and seek disconfirmation, e.g. by changing the subject, blaming your accusers, deflecting to other causes (e.g. race or gender), or running away to find people who will say nice things about you. But for all our follies, human beings are naturally pretty decent judges of character. If you're getting consistent character feedback from lots of different people, it's probably accurate.
How about don’t mind helping but don’t really want to start a network effect of mutual back and forth because I don’t want to give up my time doing these things and get caught up in reciprocal network chains.
I think there is a whole lot of anthropological and economic thinking on roles that you haven’t covered. For example gift giving can be a role people use to indicate status, and/or caretaking of a local community. Giving comes with, some people argue, complex social relationships. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy
I was doing all these things this week, and had a realization that the older I get more and more rely on me. I don't know how it got to be that way. But it was probably doing one kind thing followed by another. And now I'm getting all kinds of help requests. Just in the last week, I helped my cousin move (ridiculous amount of stuff), donated to my other cousins gofund me for his restaurant and stayed up 3 hours talking with him about his problems. Fixed a family friends laptop. The list go on. Its like snowball. I'm just accumulating connections I guess. So I suppose thats good, but on the other hand I probably spent 2 days last week on just doing things for people. If I reflect on it, I can see how this would improve someones mental health to be kind. You are connecting with people and interacting with them. So you definitely feel less lonely for example.
I think helping strangers vs helping family are different. Helping strangers is a very strong form of altruism. You come into their lives, you perform a service or deed and you leave. It could be a recurring thing, like assisting in a soup kitchen or a charity shop but it is both time bounded and emotionally bounded and when you choose to help a stranger the first time or a subsequent time the decision is voluntary.
With family though, (as I notice all your descriptions are from) it is neither time bounded nor emotionally constrained since family don't really leave - they're always there, sometimes physically and certainly emotionally. Your first act of kindness to assist might well be voluntary but the second act could well be more out of a sense of obligation than choice and creates an increasingly involuntary burden.
Good for you brother. Don’t forget to take care of yourself, but the world would be a better place if more people did everything they could to help those around them in need.
If you don't feel like doing something, you should stop. You'll eventually feel resentful and drained if you keep doing something you don't want to do.
I only help people in the things that I’m likely to be the best resource.
I’ll help you with a career transition discussion. No matter how many hours it takes.
On the other hand when my best friend asked to help him move. I told him no. Laughed in his face. None of my friends dare ask me for physical help now.
I think the world is a better place when we specialize in things we are uniquely gifted at.
The only issue that I have, is that so many people (in my industry/nation/orbit) mistake kindness for weakness.
I live in New York, which has a basic culture of "hyper aggressiveness." It isn't "rudeness," as so many people like to think of New Yorkers. They can be aggressively kind and generous. They are just aggressive.
I'm also in the tech industry, which seems to have a very aggressive and competitive culture.
It doesn't stop me from being kind and courteous, but it gets grating.
My experience is that, when someone mistakes courtesy for weakness, they start trying to "game" me. I put up with it for a bit, until they push too far.
Then the till gets slammed on their fingers.
They get very, very upset. Far more upset than if I had just disabused them early on.
I'm learning to enforce my boundaries earlier. It doesn't make me as popular, but it also prevents those "psycho freakouts."
There seem to be a lot of people who live at a level of abstraction where they perceive every interaction as being about dominance and submission. In my humble opinion it is a very limited mindset.
I consider myself to be generous person, and also slow to anger. As a result, there are people who think they hit the jackpot and found a submissive pushover who is like a flimsy tree that will bend over at the slightest breath of wind.
Of course it's much more like being water; moving around obstacles, yet always forward and unstoppable.
What matters is showing people that there can be real kindness and strength in the world. Sometimes it plants a seed for others to also have the courage to be kind. I believe that's how to make the world a better place. It sure makes life worth living.
This takes practice and experience but the gist of it here is that you have establish and understand boundaries.
Kindness is giving someone a helping hand when they need it, but not going overboard and letting them take advantage of you over and over again.
In my experience, the less you let vampires suck out your energy, the more you'll be able to give to people and the way to that is by saying No and hearing No.
I personally start by being kind and then await kindness back. If they reciprocate, great. If not, I politely decline their next request and change my response if they change theirs.
Great relationships are formed when there is a mutual exchange of happiness and ideas else it's basically one party taking advantage which is unhealthy.
I have lived in NY, and my partner was born and grew up in NY, and I find New Yorkers pretty friendly, especially when compared to other cities around the world I've lived in (all of which have had their share of friendly folk). I think you have to be friendly to live cheek by jowl with so many. However New Yorkers are brisk.
The tech industry has definitely become more aggressive over the last 20 years. I credit it to the people who decided they should join it because there is a lot of money to be made, when before it was mostly people who liked technology.
And for that latter point: I consider an aggressive attitude a sign of fear (perhaps a consequence of a kind of imposter syndrome?). Generally I pity the mean people.
> I live in New York, which has a basic culture of "hyper aggressiveness." It isn't "rudeness," as so many people like to think of New Yorkers. They can be aggressively kind and generous. They are just aggressive.
This part made me think of this video on the NY subway that exemplifies exactly what you're talking about: https://youtu.be/yVzAC7mLxJw
This guy is doing something extremely kind for this lady that it brings her to tears and yet the way he does it almost seems aggressive and demanding but it's such a nice act!
Maybe that's because you are giving your kindness to the wrong people?
And for the kindness to be appreciated and not considered as weakness you need to select who to give it to properly. And for that you need to be judgemental.
And bbc and current mainstream median culture will not tell you to be judgemental.
Why? Because they they want to be the teller what is right and what is wrong - not you.
> They get very, very upset. Far more upset than if I had just disabused them early on.
I have experienced this a few times in relationships. Was brought up to always be courteous and kind. In our society those are the most admired qualities of a person. In the big world where people didn't grow up the same way I did I felt this is often misinterpreted for weakness. Trouble always starts when I "suddenly" do not budge from a position I believe in. An example is I do not believe in splashing my life on social media.
We were also brought up to be kind to visitors. Go out of your way to make them feel at home. We joke now as adults how the only time we had Coca-cola in the house was when we had visitors. The idea is a visitor shouldn't stay too long so it is best to be kind to them. The problem starts when visitors overstay and continue to expect the same treatment. Or they visit to often.
> I live in New York, which has a basic culture of "hyper aggressiveness"
A defining trait of American culture is hyperactivity. Commenting on trivial stuff, moving around restlessly while holding a drink, despise for idle time. The "kindness" thing is a form of hyper-expressivity which is rarely seen in calm cultures.
> It isn't "rudeness," as so many people like to think of New Yorkers.
I've always suspected the perceived "rudeness" comes not from the residents of New York, but rather the people from neighboring locations that commute into New York for work. New Jersey, I'm lookin' at you.
Can you give a concrete example you specifically encountered? I lived in New York for half of my adult life before moving west. I can’t remember ever having to be too worried about that. Is it possible you just have trouble expressing yourself outwardly?
These studies are always funny. So what this is trying to tell us is: Volunteering boosts your health, while the data only provides us with "volunteers are generally in better health". Now this study "tried" to adjust to that by some filtering, but this is still a pretty big leap. Essentially what they would need to do is this:
Have one group of people who "actively" is kind to people, i.e. they actually act on their desired.
Then compare the results to a control group who "wants" to be kind to people, ideally has a proven track record of being kind to people, but are not allowed to act on that during the duration of study. Then of course they also need to still be as satisfied and happy as before, otherwise they turn into a biased control group.
Then if there are no differences, and compared to another control group of "normal" humans, there is a statistically significant improvement in health, then and only then, they may be on to something... Otherwise this is just another case of survivor bias.
This is all just pointless. At least here it's for a good cause, but I always am amazed by what kind of conclusions people derive from the well established: Causation implies correlation... Erm, NOT.
I agree that some of the examples are a bit fluffy, but later in the article, they mention a much stronger study! They cite an example of high school students being split into a control and treatment group for tutoring students with a clearly observable output based on biological data.
journalists that received their degree in social science and other similar fields probably never heard of causation/correlation principle and with no principle like this in their mind they can passionately promote whatever social justice agenda they have. (and im not against helping others or being kind. Im against nonsense in social columns on mainstream media like bbc)
in theory this looks good. reality is a bit different. I constantly have problems with my left and right neighbor (middle of pandemic and this ahole is doing a barbecue with loud music since yesterday) about their lack of consideration (this in my parents house, where I am right now). In my apartment is no different... loud music, stumping on the floor... that kind of problem you have on a building. my father have a huge heart and does all kinds of good things for people, and I watch him getting screw over by the same people he helps (this includes people he hire to work for his small company).
each passing day I feel more and more inclined to buy me a piece of land with no one around it, build a small house in the center of it and never interact with this kind of people forever.
In my experience, being kind results in self-interested people taking advantage of you. People who want to climb the corporate ladder often prey on the kind, so I feel that kindness is "taught out" of people. There is a fine line between being kind and being a doormat. I don't really know where the line is though.
This is something I have struggled with in my life and am trying to work on. The older I get the more I feel that people generally suck, which is not an attitude I particularly care to have, but it has borne itself out a number of times in my past.
For most of my life I have assumed that people are mostly good, and while this may actually be true, when I reflect on some of the times in my life I was stressed out it was due to extending myself to others, to then later feel taken advantage of or on the hook for future favors.
As an example, I helped an older neighbor put up a wireless security camera. I had the same camera and I used a double-sided industrial strength adhesive to affix it to the side of my house. When my neighbor asked for help and I made it clear upfront that I'm not too handy, and this is just what worked for me. I didn't have a drill or screws for a proper install and in my case those weren't needed. Mine had been installed for 6 months at the time using the adhesive. I told her that if she was OK with that then I'm happy to get out the ladder and install it. Turns out, the siding material on her house was different than mine and her camera only stuck to it for a couple of hours before dropping off, swinging by its solar-panel's charging cable. She stormed over, knocked aggressively on my door during my dinner, and marched me over to the swinging camera to show it to me suspended in the breeze. Her girlfriend also commented on my inept handy work.
So, I helped a neighbor and was honest upfront with a disclaimer. She accepted and then when things didn't work out she made it my fault. I was the schmuck. Oh, and I setup the software on her computer and phone so she could get email alerts for motion activity. Despite the generosity I showed with my time, when the outcome wasn't ideal I got blow-back for my good deed.
This also reminds me of the time I let my choosing beggar neighbor hop on our WiFi network until he got his installed. Needless to say, he never did get his own and became indignant when I cut his access off after several months of free use. Yep, lots of people suck.
Be kind to everyone and it will return to you ten fold. It is what worked for me personally and I will continue doing it. Anyone who says that been kind is a weakness, just don't know what been kind really means. Happy holidays everyone!
Only if the people you are kind to appreciate that.
I grew up in a third world dog-eat-dog culture where kindness is generally equated with naivete and everyone has to keep their guard up against each other.
I'm still struggling with ping-ponging between being taken advantage of or being too mean. I don't know where to draw the line and with whom.
In the last couple months alone I've been played for a fool by a few people who, to put it simply, weren't deserving of kindness. It certainly has not been good for my health, mental or physical, and it's going to leave me too cold and cynical for someone who could actually use some kindness, until I being to feel bad about that and open myself up to being exploited and so the cycle repeats.
When you are kind to others, that tends to create a connection and a shared space with others. You belong more.
But what if you only make anonymous donations, or help others in ways that are "kind" but do not allow others to connect with you? What's the contribution of kindness as "morally positive actions", and the contribution of kindness as a "social(-izing) activity"?
In todays world, more often than not, being kind is interpreted as weakness.
This is especially true in modern corporate environments, where incentives are aligned to promote a dog eat dog world, no matter what the corporates speak about 'values'. It is compounded by a culture where not getting a promotion or not earning ever increasing salaries, is propagated and interpreted as undeserving, weak or useless.
Human nature is described in Hindu scriptures as 'restless and unpredictable as a drunken monkey, stung by a scorpion'.
So people learn to hide their kindness, and put up a facade of toughness. But just as a lie repeated a million times is percieved as truth, a kind personality hidden behind toughness loses itself and the person becomes a shell of their former selves.
That is why you have news stories today celebrating small acts of kindness, integrity, honesty or truthfulness, where the norm is those acts should be a standard part of every persons life.
They mention only controlling for health reasons. How do they control for that? Is it even realistic to control all the health reasons?
And what about thousands of other things, such as
1) People who like to take high risks, might be less keen on communal activities, like volunteering.
2) People who have bad habits might also be less likely to volunteer.
3) Depressed, stressed out, cynical people may be less likely to volunteer.
4) Poor people are less likely to donate and also have lower life expectancy.
5) People who died earlier didn't make it into that point in life where they would be able to donate. This one is easier to control though.
And probably countless of other things?
I'd need to go deep into the actual study to understand how they controlled for all of that, but right now it makes me very skeptical.
It depends on the giver and on the receiver; and therefore how healthy the relationship/exchange is. Let me explain:
* if the receiver is a narcissist/sociopath, for starter they won't value the "gift" received, nothing will ever be enough, and they always seem to attract plenty fo givers
* if the giver had the disease to please whereas their own worth is depended on being told "good job" or similar, it will eventually deteriorate since in the mind of the giver, what they give will always be > what they receive and won't end well.
* Then there's victimhood chic, where people feel that they need help on everything 24/7 and becomes a co-dependent relationship between them and - slowly but steadily - the entire world; and rapidly reaches a point of impasse since the needs keep escalating and the help keep diminishing
Be kind, do no harm, and take no shit. Even if you have to tell someone to go fuck themselves, you can find a kind way to do it, which might actually more effective.
At some point, I switched off mentally towards my colleagues. NGAF and being kind can pass for the same thing for a while but indifference has its own problems.
Does watching people be kind to others also have health benefits? I’ve noticed quite a bit of videos on YouTube about tipping people large sums of money or giving away items to strangers and use that as evidence that people like to watch them. Are people attracted (not consciously) to the same mental/physical benefit?
[+] [-] xyzelement|5 years ago|reply
The alternatives are:
Victim. "I am too weak and poor to help anyone but I expect people to help me." This belief corrodes you.
Stoic(can't think of a better word.) "I don't help anyone and therefore I don't expect anyone to help me". Well, better than the victim but ends up passing up many opportunities where others are genuinely ready to help.
Abuser "I don't bother to help others but I take advantage of them" - becomes obvious very quickly and you are ostracized and hated.
Doormat "I help everyone but because I don't have healthy boundaries, I end up attracting abusers and victims." Gross.
The "best people" are clear and confident with their boundaries and generous with their time and resources when people are on the right side of the boundary. I see this a lot with truly successful senior managers and businesspeople, for example.
Even in politics, when a candidate runs for office, they want to tell stories of "X came to me and needed help and I really took the time to hear them and help them (kindness). Then Y came and they sought to rip us off and I told them to go fuck themselves (boundaries)." We seek that as species, we expect that out of the best among us, and therefore we reward those who operate from this place (and it's good for lots of other reasons.)
[+] [-] tossmeout|5 years ago|reply
* where your boundaries lie along the spectrum from self-serving to doormat
* your propensity to be generous to people on the good side of your boundaries
I myself trend close to what you'd call a stoic. Probably out of fear of being a doormat. My boundaries are healthyish, but I don't quite trust them. So I don't seek out help from others, and in return I hope they don't ask for generosity from me. Being generous without crossing my boundaries is something I have to work on.
I know some narcissists who can actually be quite generous. This fools them into thinking, "There's no way I'm a narcissist!" because they can easily recall past instances of generosity. Yet they're still regarded by others as selfish. Their boundaries are shifted so far in their favor that they feel taxed being generous to others who most would deem worthy of generosity. And they expect sympathy, attention, and generosity in situations where most would not have that expectation.
These abusers often do end up ostracized, but that doesn't always look like solitude. They become victims, upset at their crummy relationships and unable to garner sympathy from others, yet unwilling to ever point the finger at themselves. Some end up alone, yes. Others befriend other victims who they can commiserate with, but those relationships don't last long for obvious reasons. So it's sort of a fleeting, on-again off-again ostracism.
Of course I'm speaking in generalities here. Plenty of victims aren't narcissists, etc. And I do have sympathy. Nobody chooses to be a narcissist. I think some people are just wired that way, or perhaps set on that course by environmental factors early in life. Either way, it's not a choice. So I think it's somewhat of a tragic condition.
My advice would be that if you're consistently getting negative feedback about your personality traits, take it seriously. It'll be tempting to deny and seek disconfirmation, e.g. by changing the subject, blaming your accusers, deflecting to other causes (e.g. race or gender), or running away to find people who will say nice things about you. But for all our follies, human beings are naturally pretty decent judges of character. If you're getting consistent character feedback from lots of different people, it's probably accurate.
[+] [-] raducu|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trianglem|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dahart|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _bz2r|5 years ago|reply
Stoicism has more to do with things that happen to you vs how you treat other people.
It's great that you disclaim it a bit with "can't think of a better word", but it's just inaccurate.
Perhaps "libertarian"? Or "rugged individualist"?
[+] [-] laurent92|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Biganon|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dukeofdoom|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yulker|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leonroy|5 years ago|reply
With family though, (as I notice all your descriptions are from) it is neither time bounded nor emotionally constrained since family don't really leave - they're always there, sometimes physically and certainly emotionally. Your first act of kindness to assist might well be voluntary but the second act could well be more out of a sense of obligation than choice and creates an increasingly involuntary burden.
[+] [-] j2bax|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] runamok|5 years ago|reply
I have found you have to be careful not to expect much in return otherwise you can start feeling resentful.
[+] [-] thewarrior|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] elbear|5 years ago|reply
If you don't feel like doing something, you should stop. You'll eventually feel resentful and drained if you keep doing something you don't want to do.
[+] [-] Technically|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] throwaway98797|5 years ago|reply
I’ll help you with a career transition discussion. No matter how many hours it takes.
On the other hand when my best friend asked to help him move. I told him no. Laughed in his face. None of my friends dare ask me for physical help now.
I think the world is a better place when we specialize in things we are uniquely gifted at.
[+] [-] ChrisMarshallNY|5 years ago|reply
I live in New York, which has a basic culture of "hyper aggressiveness." It isn't "rudeness," as so many people like to think of New Yorkers. They can be aggressively kind and generous. They are just aggressive.
I'm also in the tech industry, which seems to have a very aggressive and competitive culture.
It doesn't stop me from being kind and courteous, but it gets grating.
My experience is that, when someone mistakes courtesy for weakness, they start trying to "game" me. I put up with it for a bit, until they push too far.
Then the till gets slammed on their fingers.
They get very, very upset. Far more upset than if I had just disabused them early on.
I'm learning to enforce my boundaries earlier. It doesn't make me as popular, but it also prevents those "psycho freakouts."
[+] [-] warent|5 years ago|reply
There seem to be a lot of people who live at a level of abstraction where they perceive every interaction as being about dominance and submission. In my humble opinion it is a very limited mindset.
I consider myself to be generous person, and also slow to anger. As a result, there are people who think they hit the jackpot and found a submissive pushover who is like a flimsy tree that will bend over at the slightest breath of wind.
Of course it's much more like being water; moving around obstacles, yet always forward and unstoppable.
What matters is showing people that there can be real kindness and strength in the world. Sometimes it plants a seed for others to also have the courage to be kind. I believe that's how to make the world a better place. It sure makes life worth living.
[+] [-] swat535|5 years ago|reply
This takes practice and experience but the gist of it here is that you have establish and understand boundaries.
Kindness is giving someone a helping hand when they need it, but not going overboard and letting them take advantage of you over and over again.
In my experience, the less you let vampires suck out your energy, the more you'll be able to give to people and the way to that is by saying No and hearing No.
I personally start by being kind and then await kindness back. If they reciprocate, great. If not, I politely decline their next request and change my response if they change theirs.
Great relationships are formed when there is a mutual exchange of happiness and ideas else it's basically one party taking advantage which is unhealthy.
[+] [-] gumby|5 years ago|reply
The tech industry has definitely become more aggressive over the last 20 years. I credit it to the people who decided they should join it because there is a lot of money to be made, when before it was mostly people who liked technology.
And for that latter point: I consider an aggressive attitude a sign of fear (perhaps a consequence of a kind of imposter syndrome?). Generally I pity the mean people.
[+] [-] vecinu|5 years ago|reply
This part made me think of this video on the NY subway that exemplifies exactly what you're talking about: https://youtu.be/yVzAC7mLxJw
This guy is doing something extremely kind for this lady that it brings her to tears and yet the way he does it almost seems aggressive and demanding but it's such a nice act!
[+] [-] go13|5 years ago|reply
And for the kindness to be appreciated and not considered as weakness you need to select who to give it to properly. And for that you need to be judgemental.
And bbc and current mainstream median culture will not tell you to be judgemental.
Why? Because they they want to be the teller what is right and what is wrong - not you.
[+] [-] mmsimanga|5 years ago|reply
I have experienced this a few times in relationships. Was brought up to always be courteous and kind. In our society those are the most admired qualities of a person. In the big world where people didn't grow up the same way I did I felt this is often misinterpreted for weakness. Trouble always starts when I "suddenly" do not budge from a position I believe in. An example is I do not believe in splashing my life on social media.
We were also brought up to be kind to visitors. Go out of your way to make them feel at home. We joke now as adults how the only time we had Coca-cola in the house was when we had visitors. The idea is a visitor shouldn't stay too long so it is best to be kind to them. The problem starts when visitors overstay and continue to expect the same treatment. Or they visit to often.
[+] [-] bluetomcat|5 years ago|reply
A defining trait of American culture is hyperactivity. Commenting on trivial stuff, moving around restlessly while holding a drink, despise for idle time. The "kindness" thing is a form of hyper-expressivity which is rarely seen in calm cultures.
[+] [-] AndrewUnmuted|5 years ago|reply
I've always suspected the perceived "rudeness" comes not from the residents of New York, but rather the people from neighboring locations that commute into New York for work. New Jersey, I'm lookin' at you.
[+] [-] iamcreasy|5 years ago|reply
Can you elaborate on it? I don't have much experience interacting with people.
[+] [-] momokoko|5 years ago|reply
Can you give a concrete example you specifically encountered? I lived in New York for half of my adult life before moving west. I can’t remember ever having to be too worried about that. Is it possible you just have trouble expressing yourself outwardly?
[+] [-] marta_morena_9|5 years ago|reply
Have one group of people who "actively" is kind to people, i.e. they actually act on their desired.
Then compare the results to a control group who "wants" to be kind to people, ideally has a proven track record of being kind to people, but are not allowed to act on that during the duration of study. Then of course they also need to still be as satisfied and happy as before, otherwise they turn into a biased control group.
Then if there are no differences, and compared to another control group of "normal" humans, there is a statistically significant improvement in health, then and only then, they may be on to something... Otherwise this is just another case of survivor bias.
This is all just pointless. At least here it's for a good cause, but I always am amazed by what kind of conclusions people derive from the well established: Causation implies correlation... Erm, NOT.
[+] [-] anordin95|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 11thEarlOfMar|5 years ago|reply
Is human behavior truly so opaque that experiments cannot be designed that conclusively determine specific causation?
[+] [-] go13|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] onlyreply|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] atum47|5 years ago|reply
each passing day I feel more and more inclined to buy me a piece of land with no one around it, build a small house in the center of it and never interact with this kind of people forever.
[+] [-] anonytrary|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] replwoacause|5 years ago|reply
For most of my life I have assumed that people are mostly good, and while this may actually be true, when I reflect on some of the times in my life I was stressed out it was due to extending myself to others, to then later feel taken advantage of or on the hook for future favors.
As an example, I helped an older neighbor put up a wireless security camera. I had the same camera and I used a double-sided industrial strength adhesive to affix it to the side of my house. When my neighbor asked for help and I made it clear upfront that I'm not too handy, and this is just what worked for me. I didn't have a drill or screws for a proper install and in my case those weren't needed. Mine had been installed for 6 months at the time using the adhesive. I told her that if she was OK with that then I'm happy to get out the ladder and install it. Turns out, the siding material on her house was different than mine and her camera only stuck to it for a couple of hours before dropping off, swinging by its solar-panel's charging cable. She stormed over, knocked aggressively on my door during my dinner, and marched me over to the swinging camera to show it to me suspended in the breeze. Her girlfriend also commented on my inept handy work.
So, I helped a neighbor and was honest upfront with a disclaimer. She accepted and then when things didn't work out she made it my fault. I was the schmuck. Oh, and I setup the software on her computer and phone so she could get email alerts for motion activity. Despite the generosity I showed with my time, when the outcome wasn't ideal I got blow-back for my good deed.
This also reminds me of the time I let my choosing beggar neighbor hop on our WiFi network until he got his installed. Needless to say, he never did get his own and became indignant when I cut his access off after several months of free use. Yep, lots of people suck.
[+] [-] tux|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Scapeghost|5 years ago|reply
I grew up in a third world dog-eat-dog culture where kindness is generally equated with naivete and everyone has to keep their guard up against each other.
I'm still struggling with ping-ponging between being taken advantage of or being too mean. I don't know where to draw the line and with whom.
In the last couple months alone I've been played for a fool by a few people who, to put it simply, weren't deserving of kindness. It certainly has not been good for my health, mental or physical, and it's going to leave me too cold and cynical for someone who could actually use some kindness, until I being to feel bad about that and open myself up to being exploited and so the cycle repeats.
[+] [-] slx26|5 years ago|reply
But what if you only make anonymous donations, or help others in ways that are "kind" but do not allow others to connect with you? What's the contribution of kindness as "morally positive actions", and the contribution of kindness as a "social(-izing) activity"?
[+] [-] kumarvvr|5 years ago|reply
This is especially true in modern corporate environments, where incentives are aligned to promote a dog eat dog world, no matter what the corporates speak about 'values'. It is compounded by a culture where not getting a promotion or not earning ever increasing salaries, is propagated and interpreted as undeserving, weak or useless.
Human nature is described in Hindu scriptures as 'restless and unpredictable as a drunken monkey, stung by a scorpion'.
So people learn to hide their kindness, and put up a facade of toughness. But just as a lie repeated a million times is percieved as truth, a kind personality hidden behind toughness loses itself and the person becomes a shell of their former selves.
That is why you have news stories today celebrating small acts of kindness, integrity, honesty or truthfulness, where the norm is those acts should be a standard part of every persons life.
[+] [-] mewpmewp2|5 years ago|reply
1) People who like to take high risks, might be less keen on communal activities, like volunteering.
2) People who have bad habits might also be less likely to volunteer.
3) Depressed, stressed out, cynical people may be less likely to volunteer.
4) Poor people are less likely to donate and also have lower life expectancy.
5) People who died earlier didn't make it into that point in life where they would be able to donate. This one is easier to control though.
And probably countless of other things? I'd need to go deep into the actual study to understand how they controlled for all of that, but right now it makes me very skeptical.
[+] [-] SMAAART|5 years ago|reply
It depends on the giver and on the receiver; and therefore how healthy the relationship/exchange is. Let me explain:
* if the receiver is a narcissist/sociopath, for starter they won't value the "gift" received, nothing will ever be enough, and they always seem to attract plenty fo givers
* if the giver had the disease to please whereas their own worth is depended on being told "good job" or similar, it will eventually deteriorate since in the mind of the giver, what they give will always be > what they receive and won't end well.
* Then there's victimhood chic, where people feel that they need help on everything 24/7 and becomes a co-dependent relationship between them and - slowly but steadily - the entire world; and rapidly reaches a point of impasse since the needs keep escalating and the help keep diminishing
Buddha had the 4-part solution:
1. Help yourself
2. Climb a mountain, tell nobody
3. More suffering is needed
4. The enemy is a wonderful teacher
[+] [-] haunter|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] koeng|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 0xbadcafebee|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ArcMex|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fritex|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] YooLi|5 years ago|reply