-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How do you define a good person or a bad person?
- Thread starter YoursTrue
- Start date
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So what are your views they would adhere to in order to be considered good or bad?
Heyo
Veteran Member
People are neither good nor bad. Actions are.
That is a core principle of moral philosophy.
Having said that, colloquially we often refer to people who constantly behave in a moral way as "good" and people who frequently act immoral as "bad". Overall most people are "good" most of the time.
What constitutes a "good" or "bad" action depends your personal moral principles.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
So what are your views they would adhere to in order to be considered good or bad?
Notice that the word "views" in effect cheat, because you don't see good or bad. You think/feel it. And lot of words have several definitions and even the verb "be" as for these 2 cases of the cat is multicolored versus killing another human is bad, is not the same definition of "is".
The bold word gives it away as subjective to a given person.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
That is too vague. It sounds nice, but in practice it is meaningless for all the different variations of defining harm.
Well, I get to define harm. That's as specific as I get.
Maybe vague but for me, that is all there is to it.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, so do I and according to that you are harmful.
The problem is that it is not objective and to learn to understand that, is not something all humans learn.
In effect for sociology, psychology and philosophy for harm if you want to avoid that, you have to learn it is relative and inter-subjective.
A good person is someone who (generally) does good.
A bad person is someone who (generally) does bad.
A bad person is someone who (generally) does bad.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, that is tautologies.
Hermit Philosopher
Selflessly here for you
By the impact they have on others
Last edited:
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
It is too vague.
We Never Know
No Slack
Watch how they act when they think no one is looking.
The most important character traits(one of) a person can possess is integrity. Integrity is what you do when no one is watching,, it's doing the right thing all the time.
Hermit Philosopher
Selflessly here for you
If I accidentally cause suffering onto another and later do all that’s in my power to help them out of their suffering; perhaps I’m not a bad person, but one who does not think things through properly.
Yet, if I frequently cause suffering onto others (even through mere carelessness), I my not wish to be a bad person, but I certainly cannot consider myself a good one.
In my view however, what we or others say that we are, is not what matters. What matters is the actual impact that we personally* have on situations.
*) “Personally”, because one has only rights, powers and responsibilities over one’s own participation; not over that of another.
Humbly,
Hermit
A person is neither good nor bad. A person simply is. It is their reactions to their stimuli that determines behavior, which, based on societal standards, is deemed "good" or "bad."
What if you think they think no one is looking, but they actually know you're looking and they're adjusting their behavior based on your assumption that they think no one is looking?
Even if one doesn't have any sort of religious belief, for example?
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
You shall know them by their fruits. Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit. But a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.
Just thought that up did you?