Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEPAnd naive and uninformed actions rarely to never lead to a positive result.

You base this guesstimate on what?

Logic. Common sense.

Common sense as in "many people think so." Where's the logic in that? It used to be common sense that the Sun orbits the Earth.

I don't think common sense means what you think it means.
I will help you:
Common sense [External Link]

Sure, it would be fine and dandy if that actually meant something, but the general usage is "I don't have proof but this fits what I know, it's just common sense." Common sense, in any meaning of the expression, simply does not trump proven fact or real science.

So, when confronted with clear definitions of what something I say means and how I use it, you just chose to ignore it and say "but that's not what everyone does!", just so you can continue debating? :D
I really don't care how "everyone" uses it, even if you were right (and I don't think you are). I use it by its defined meaning.

Quoting: tuubiAgain, why do you think anything that isn't a spectacular success is a failure and not just a less than perfect result.

I do not think that and neither did I say it. You are just trying to project something onto me, and I don't know where that comes from.

Quoting: tuubiAnd why would failure be more likely than some level of success when specifically talking about philantrophic endeavours or trying to do good? Cynicism?

It does not matter what you do. Do it uninformed and naive and you are more likely to fail than to succeed. There isn't a single kind of endeavour that would be exempt from this rule.
Now, I'm not talking about small stuff like helping someone up who fell down - such actions do not really require thought to begin with.
I'm talking about bigger decisions like that African charity stuff. Something with a larger scale impact that requires more thought to understand the implications.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEPAnd naive and uninformed actions rarely to never lead to a positive result.

You base this guesstimate on what?

Logic. Common sense.

Common sense as in "many people think so." Where's the logic in that? It used to be common sense that the Sun orbits the Earth.

I don't think common sense means what you think it means.
I will help you:
Common sense [External Link]

In a psychology context, Smedslund defines common sense as "the system of implications shared by the competent users of a language" and notes, "A proposition in a given context belongs to common sense if and only if all competent users of the language involved agree that the proposition in the given context is true and that its negation is false."

I think you would be hard pressed to find someone to disagree with the notion that you should know what you are doing in order to produce the results that you want. Thus, common sense.

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEPIf you don't know what you are doing, how likely are you to achieve what you want to achieve?

Who knows. The scope or your question is too vague and there are too many variables. Sure, the result might be negative, but isn't it more likely it has no profound effect at all? That's not the same as negative. It's just insignificant.

You wasted your (and more than likely someone else's) time.
Time is the most important resource any non-immortal being has.
I'd call that quite negative. And that is the best case scenario - of the failure cases, which are more likely than the success cases.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEPAnd naive and uninformed actions rarely to never lead to a positive result.

You base this guesstimate on what?

Logic. Common sense.
If you don't know what you are doing, how likely are you to achieve what you want to achieve?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Doc AngeloThat means that only those people are do-gooders that are doing things that you wouldn't do. Or people who have views you don't share. You label them do-gooders as soon as you disagree with their views or the reasoning behind their actions. If I would do the same, you would be a do-gooder from my perspective.

It really just boils down to your disagreement with their views and actions. You don't like what they say and do, and you show your dislike by calling those people names. In my opinion, that's neither useful nor helpful for you or for them.

Uhm, no?
I call them do-gooders because their well-meaning actions (would) lead to negative results.
Of course I disagree with actions that lead to negative results. There is nothing positive about a people incapable of defending themselves having to be kept kicking by another party spending their resources for eternity. That is only logical.

But of course, it is so much easier to reduce what I do to name-calling instead of swallowing the bitter pill that many good-willed actions are actually harmful ones in a nice disguise.

Quoting: Purple Library GuyWhoever's right, the problem is not the intention to do good, but the possiblity that the means chosen to do it may be mistaken.

Yes and no.
It isn't the intention to do good that makes one a do-gooder. Everyone (generally) intends to do good.
But those that go about it in a very naive way are the most likely to actually create or support a negative effect.
So a do-gooder would be more identified by how naive and uninformed they act.
And naive and uninformed actions rarely to never lead to a positive result. Though they admittedly might.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: TheSHEEEPIf I actually did go out of my way to defend the poor and downtrodden Panterra people, and believe I am doing good, I would be a do-gooder.
Because that would only lead to the Panterra people never learning to defend themselves and always require someone to do it for them, it would actually be a bad result.

And what if those poor and downtrodden Panterra people actually need help to achieve basic necessities that would allow them to "learn"? I know the oft-repeated adage that "what does not kill you makes you stronger", but sometimes what doesn't kill you very effectively keeps you from getting up and helping yourself. Or ends up killing off most of your community, delaying recovery and learning by generations.

Obviously (or not...) helping them to learn includes protecting them for the time being.
But only for so long.

If the Panterra people after long years of trying to teach them turn out simply incapable of self-defence, there is no reason to further waste your resources on them.

I'm not per se against defending the weak, but it must come with the goal of making them strong, too, so that you gain an ally in the end instead of just another bottomless hole to take care of.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: TheSHEEEPBut: What I say is that there is a difference between hypocrites (people who say A and do B) and do-gooders (people who say A, do A, claim that A is good, but A is actually a bad thing once you think about it more deeply).

So, a try-do-gooder?

Kinda, if you want. It's kind of a mouthful, though...
Edited my post with an example.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: jens

Quoting: Doc AngeloI really think "Scheingutmensch" in German and something like "pseu-do-gooder" would be more fitting and not as misleading.

I would go for "hypocrite", or in German "scheinheilig".

That is a hypocrite, yes.
But: What I say is that there is a difference between hypocrites (people who say A and do B) and do-gooders (people who say A, do A, claim that A is good, but A is actually a bad thing once you think about it more deeply).
I can only point at my own example a page ago.

For example, if I started proclaiming that everyone should start defending the poor and downtrodden Panterra people (imaginary name), I would be a hypocrite.
Because I do not truly believe in that, but know that people like it when someone proclaims that.

If I actually did go out of my way to defend the poor and downtrodden Panterra people, and believe I am doing good, I would be a do-gooder.
Because that would only lead to the Panterra people never learning to defend themselves and always require someone to do it for them, it would actually be a bad result.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: EikeI'm a proud do-gooder/Gutmensch. I hope.

Yeah, I think most of us figured that out by now :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tuubiHowever, it's a fair bet that a person who enjoys conflict and being a dick towards strangers turns out to be a self-centered bastard

The problem here to me seems to be that just being honest and speaking some uncomfortable truths is already enough for many to consider someone a dick.

Quoting: tuubiBlindly dividing people you don't know into "do-gooders" and "actually good people" is just plain counterproductive.

Right, but I don't think I did that? Or someone else?
My very first post wasn't about me thinking that everyone who is offended at this game must be a do-gooder. Just the knowledge that some of them are, makes it all the sweeter.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: wvstolzing

Quoting: tuubiI can be a dick, but (hopefully) only to people who know my twisted sense of humour and take it as a joke.

The guy in this video, on the other hand, is a dick indiscriminately:

'People think that I'm this do-gooder; they don't realize that I do it because it's fun' [External Link]

Aye, he is!
And he has done more for people than a hundred do-gooders combined.
Being nice is not a requirement for doing good. Even wanting to do good isn't.
I don't have the recipe for how your actions end up causing a positive result, either, but I am fairly sure it is independent from your intrinsic motivation.

In the end, it only matters what you do, not why you do it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments