What is the difference between being good and being nice? Can you ever be good without the ability to cause harm?
Good vs Nice
- Thread starter Tango India Mike
- Start date
Cod liver oil is good, sugar saturated icecream is nice.
I distrust nice people, because they are trying to be appealing or enticing, whereas I respect principled people who are willing to do what is right, even it it makes them immensely unpopular or disliked, because they are good.
I distrust nice people, because they are trying to be appealing or enticing, whereas I respect principled people who are willing to do what is right, even it it makes them immensely unpopular or disliked, because they are good.
Oh here we go again...
Hot takes about how Fe is nice but causes harm, and Fi is harsh but principled.
Hot takes about how Fe is nice but causes harm, and Fi is harsh but principled.
My brain translated Fe to iron.Oh here we go again...
Hot takes about how Fe is nice but causes harm, and Fi is harsh but principled.
I believe you can't be good without being sufficiently strong first. If you are not capable of doing anything you can't choose. "Nearly all men can stand adversity but if you want to test a man's character give him power" - Abraham Lincoln.
Most people are nice because they dont have the power to be evil and get away with it.
Most people are nice because they dont have the power to be evil and get away with it.
- Sep 28, 2008
- 41,249
- 246,805
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
Ironically, most people in power have faked their niceness to get where they are.
A truly nice/good person with power is an anomaly.
An anomaly that nice/good people without power don't generally know how to recognize
because they can't differentiate between good and evil within the power structure due to their own fears.
Humanity in general isn't great and those who desire evil are partly responsible for the world being what it is while the rest fails under shit happens.
I'm not sure there is a universal definition of these things / that might affect how much distinction or tension one sees.
But I'm going to take it as moral vs not-unpleasant.
I think whether one ever has to see a tension between these things is almost synonymous with whether the world is ideal or not. I do not think it's reasonable or ideal that we crave sugar, despite its adverse effects. The idea that you have to bear pain to do what's moral just means there's something wrong with how things are.
I think a moral person is one who would not wish the unpleasant on people, but also principled enough to stand up to convention and things like that when it's right.
But I'm going to take it as moral vs not-unpleasant.
I think whether one ever has to see a tension between these things is almost synonymous with whether the world is ideal or not. I do not think it's reasonable or ideal that we crave sugar, despite its adverse effects. The idea that you have to bear pain to do what's moral just means there's something wrong with how things are.
I think a moral person is one who would not wish the unpleasant on people, but also principled enough to stand up to convention and things like that when it's right.
I think of good and nice as two sides of the same coin. When people say that avoiding to hurt other people's feelings is an Fe-thing, I don't agree. The way I see it, Fe is very open to hurt people's feelings (cold Ti-correction), wanting the "best" for others (in the nicest way possible, but it's still not "nice"). Fi has a lot more respect for people's sense of identity and the pillars that supports their confidence and beliefs (even if they are "incorrect") so they can be who they need to be (considerate Te efficiency).
It's super easy to pick who will be a prick if they get power: when among people they are only nice to people who agree with their opinions.
Have to agree. "Nice people" who are also stong Judgers end up just being nice to nice people, and horribly intolerant of people who are sort of deaf to feelings.
As an intj, I sense an air of rebuke or disaproval here, because my outward focus isn't on feelings. It can honestly be as obnoxious having Fe users calling me a troll, as if I were to unleash my Te and begin criticising people as ineffectual, disorganised, unambitious, or weak.
Perhaps the danger is in expecting others to be as we would want them, instead of accepting people as they are, and encouraging them to be better.
- Sep 28, 2008
- 41,249
- 246,805
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
I don't think it's quite that simple, but I see where you're going. It's a good rule of thumb.
It's mostly from my experience of work colleagues outside the workplace. They way some of the nicest people behave towards waitresses, bar tenders, or random strangers really reveals a lot.
I think the objective reality of being good would be that we try our best to, and fail at being perfectly good, though it is a task that can’t be shameful to try as each person will go about doing this in a different manner than another. Being nice or kind May be the ability to accept our difference in how we may view what is good since we’re all developing in defining and refining how to carry this out. Easy in theory, difficult and painful to carry out, and I guess is what would be the best way we all experience life separately of our own lives and together as well.
I concur. I am okay burning people as long as my intention is to speak the truth, no matter how they perceive it. I've spent too long playing nice, and it gets you no where. Sometimes, people need a long hard look in the mirror. Though, those who are intentionally rude have zero excuses either. Unfortunately, there are many who say one thing and do another thing entirely, or who are intentionally malicious for shits and giggles. I am learning that I don't have to be liked by the wrong sort of people.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bahahahahahaha! The kevin hart video is hilarious!!!!
