Do thoughts or actions make up your personality?

Pineapple_Juice · 03-12-2011, 05:17 PM

If you have mean thoughts but nice actions, are you a nice person or a mean one?

Murder.Of.Crows · 03-12-2011, 05:27 PM

That reminds of the scene from The Never Ending Story. The mirror that shows men their true selves, but I think, it is both that make you who you are. If you have wicked thoughts, but act kindly, then you must also have a conflicting thought of kindness to oppose your malicious tendencies. So, you are both cruel and kind, the fact that you decide to be nice over cruel just shows what kind of person you are.

KissMeDeadly · 03-12-2011, 05:30 PM

It depends on why you do nice things instead of acting on your malicious thoughts.

If you do it for fear of retribution or punishment, you're probably not the best person

However, if you do it because you recognize that those thoughts are hurtful and you don't want to be a dick, I'd say you're good.

Murder.Of.Crows · 03-12-2011, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly

It depends on why you do nice things instead of acting on your malicious thoughts.

If you do it for fear of retribution or punishment, you're probably not the best person

However, if you do it because you recognize that those thoughts are hurtful and you don't want to be a dick, I'd say you're good.

Or you just have morals ground into your head that decide what is wrong or right. In psychology I learned that after the age of 5, whatever we are taught that is wrong or right, our brain does not differentiate between the two. It comes down to personal choice. However morals taught before we are 5, we will automatically know what is wrong and right, without thinking into it, later in our lives. Much like the difference between theft and speeding. Both are wrong, but only theft eats at our conscience.

KissMeDeadly · 03-12-2011, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murder.Of.Crows

Or you just have morals ground into your head that decide what is wrong or right. In psychology I learned that after the age of 5, whatever we are taught that is wrong or right, our brain does not differentiate between the two. It comes down to personal choice. However morals taught before we are 5, we will automatically know what is wrong and right, without thinking into it, later in our lives. Much like the difference between theft and speeding. Both are wrong, but only theft eats at our conscience.

The way I see it, if it hurts somebody without need (like self defense or something) it's wrong, all other things are pretty much shades of grey.

And don't give me that "society created right and wrong hurr durr" because while it enforces it, and, to some extent, distorts the lines (like music piracy...I just can't see how that's 'wrong' in the sense that it's a victimless crime), I believe every person is born with an instinctual sense of right and wrong.

For example, speeding might not be wrong, sure, it's dangerous, but in most cases completely harmless

Beating your puppy to death and then jacking off to the video is wrong and everybody fucking knows it unless you've got some kind of mental disability or disorder.

Murder.Of.Crows · 03-12-2011, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly

The way I see it, if it hurts somebody without need (like self defense or something) it's wrong, all other things are pretty much shades of grey.

And don't give me that "society created right and wrong hurr durr" because while it enforces it, and, to some extent, distorts the lines (like music piracy...I just can't see how that's 'wrong' in the sense that it's a victimless crime), I believe every person is born with an instinctual sense of right and wrong.

For example, speeding might not be wrong, sure, it's dangerous, but in most cases completely harmless

Beating your puppy to death and then jacking off to the video is wrong and everybody fucking knows it unless you've got some kind of mental disability or disorder.

Society does create a sense of right and wrong. There isn't any instinct in it, humans are naturally animalistic, the only instinctual morals we have our for our own protection and protection of our offspring. Anything outside of that is pure societies building.

No, every crime has a victim. There is no such thing as a victimless crime. Pirating allows you to enjoy the product without paying for it, the company that publishes that product now goes without the amount of income they expect. The creators of that product now will be payed less for their next product. Now they will not be able to make as much money as they expected and often fall into debt because of their investment to the product they hoped to sell. Thus, by downloading such products the victims are everyone who supported that product and all future products.

KissMeDeadly · 03-12-2011, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murder.Of.Crows

No, every crime has a victim. There is no such thing as a victimless crime. Pirating allows you to enjoy the product without paying for it, the company that publishes that product now goes without the amount of income they expect. The creators of that product now will be payed less for their next product. Now they will not be able to make as much money as they expected and often fall into debt because of their investment to the product they hoped to sell. Thus, by downloading such products the victims are everyone who supported that product and all future products.

Aha, but, in my case, I'm poor. I'm not going to spend money on it either way. I don't see how listening to a song is stealing, sure, I'd be helping everybody out, but in the end their not getting paid by me either way.

Of course, this goes more into the fact that every example is victim to circumstance, and that my individual actions mean little in the grand scheme of things (Not everybody can do this, but I can, 'cause I'm oh so fucking special)

And as far as societal moral building, I agree to a certain extent, in that our 'morals' are basically instincts of survival and that of our offspring, however, even animals don't go out and butcher that of the same species for no reason. Humans have a unique ability to kill for the feeling of power, whereas animals might kill one of there own for things like territorial rights or power struggles within a pack (like wolves) even thought most of the time it's just a fight, and doesn't end in murder.

Take John Wayne Gacey for example, was he ****** and killing people for his own survival? I think not. Therefore he has gone outside of the basic survival instinct and done something malicious anyway, which, I think, is wrong, as it serves no purpose for him other than a sexual thrill.

Alan · 03-12-2011, 06:36 PM

False dichotomy.

Murder.Of.Crows · 03-12-2011, 06:46 PM

What do you mean Alan?

Pineapple_Juice · 03-12-2011, 08:02 PM

I think he means that nothing is black or white, that there are shades of gray.

Catch · 03-12-2011, 08:32 PM

This may seem weird, but I've known people who want to help everyone and their help is unwelcome and often damaging. They might have nice thoughts, but what they produce is something mean. I think people either think or don't. The people who don't think are loose cannons.

Fruitbat · 03-13-2011, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pineapple_Juice

If you have mean thoughts but nice actions, are you a nice person or a mean one?

No idea. No one is really nice, we all like to think we are nice, but at the end of the day, we are nasty.

$haDe · 03-13-2011, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pineapple_Juice

If you have mean thoughts but nice actions, are you a nice person or a mean one?

I think what really matters is the outcome.

I have no problem lashing out when people screw up, trying to help me and I have no problem buying a lunch for some jealous colleague who stupidly help my cause via the plan of destroying m, as well.

Solumina · 03-13-2011, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fruitbat

No idea. No one is really nice, we all like to think we are nice, but at the end of the day, we are nasty.

That is very likely true of most people but I cannot believe it is true of everyone.

Despanan · 03-13-2011, 08:40 AM

Fruitbat just brings that out in people.

Ben Lahnger · 03-13-2011, 08:45 AM

Dumb question. I want my two minutes back.

Pineapple_Juice · 03-13-2011, 01:13 PM

When did you turn into such a fagmo?

Alan · 03-13-2011, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pineapple_Juice

I think he means that nothing is black or white, that there are shades of gray.

Nah, that still implies a dichotomy where you just fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

What I mean is, I think it was Charles Pierce who said that we don't cry because we're sad, but rather we're sad because we cry. That's been proven by psychology. All actions are perfectly intended, and all intentions are actions; there's no difference.

The issue is that you CAN'T see the full implication of the other's action/intention. When you act, you intend to act. Even in some instances, inaction is a form of intended action, such as when you have an itch but decide not to scratch.
Your question stems from the issue that you can never perfectly know the other's intentions because you are not the other. You can never be perfectly sure of the thoughts of others and when an apparent inaction is a conscious action.

ape descendant · 03-14-2011, 12:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fruitbat

No idea. No one is really nice, we all like to think we are nice, but at the end of the day, we are nasty.

ORLY... how nasty? *bats eyelashes flirtatiously*

Fruitbat · 03-14-2011, 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ape descendant

ORLY... how nasty? *bats eyelashes flirtatiously*

You are bad AD.. very very very very naughty, and need a good spankin'

I'll just go and find someone to spank you... who would you like? I've heard that Apathy's child is pretty good with a limp celery stalk?

CuckooTuli · 03-14-2011, 03:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fruitbat

You are bad AD.. very very very very naughty, and need a good spankin'

I'll just go and find someone to spank you... who would you like? I've heard that Apathy's child is pretty good with a limp celery stalk?

Jesus, the fuck did I miss? *wanders over to porn thread hopefully*

Expecto Sherlock · 03-14-2011, 08:54 AM

The general attitude is the defining factor.

Having "bad" thoughts but doing good actions, holding a grudge because you're somehow obligated to "good" actions, makes one rather nasty.

ape descendant · 03-14-2011, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fruitbat

You are bad AD.. very very very very naughty, and need a good spankin'

I'll just go and find someone to spank you... who would you like? I've heard that Apathy's child is pretty good with a limp celery stalk?

I would like to request some one with soft hands and a squishy paddle.

Fruitbat · 03-14-2011, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ape descendant

I would like to request some one with soft hands and a squishy paddle.

Okay.. I'll just see what I can find.. How about a ping pong bat with a cushion strapped to it?

Cuckoo - are you volunteering to spank AD?

Catch · 03-14-2011, 11:05 PM

Seriously, actions count. You could watch Quincy Jones MD all day and think I'd work out the problem between both people with reason and dicipline; however, when faced with two out-of-control loons and figuring out they are taking up your time with all their crap and actually suggest a fight while pondering the gloriousness of the remains... that is the real answer.