Are You a Good Person?
Posted in Values and Virtues on June 6th, 2007 by Erin DietrichWhat makes a good person? What does it really mean to be “good”? How do you determine if other people are good, and more importantly, how do you determine if you are? Are there different levels of good and are any of them better than others? Although people, and even societies, have different definitions of what makes a person good, there appears to be common denominators.
The first (and easiest) measure we are taught to identify “good” is in relation to our family of origin. We first learn to define good when we are praised as “good little boys and girls”. Since these measures vary by family, they are slightly different for everyone. Our family influences how we view authority, laws, God, relationships and money and help form our initial values and morals. As we grow doing “good” usually equates to doing as well, if not better than one’s parents, and is typically tied to our ability to live within our family’s guidelines of good. We use our family to measure our goodness.
The second layer of a good person emerges when you are asked to both identify and follow rules of authority. This includes a diversity of written and enforced laws – the laws of your country, job and religion - and a larger number of unwritten, but equally enforced, social “laws”. You are walking the “straight and narrow” path and living a good life. Society as a whole deems you as good if you are able to follow all of these rules.
Getting to this level of good is a final destination for many people. Heck, for a lot of people getting to the first level is a good final destination. However, you can go deeper.
There are other types of good. People who don’t just follow all the rules, but are loved and respected despite “marching to their own drum”. They define good and doing good for themselves. This is where the measure of being a good person is examining your personal values and virtues in relation to existing measures. You may start by looking through history or other cultures to define good. Maybe you decide to look past the words of the Ten Commandments to look at the deeper Christian values and virtues . Or maybe you find a slightly different direction by examining how Buddhists define a good person. Or maybe you begin to examine your own values, such as questioning integrity and honesty and beginning to differentiate between the two.
People who have experienced all levels and definitions of good – familial, legal/moral, examining values and virtues - soon find themselves in a strange place where they need to figure out how to live in a world of moral complexity and become a good person on their own terms.
This creates a whole lot of questions. How can something be illegal but not bad or legal but not good? How can you follow all the rules needed to be a “good” person but still be a pretty miserable person, or conversely, how does the heathen down the street come off as a good person? Only then can you begin to choose how to live and to define what is good in your life.
Related Posts:
Nice People Are Overrated
You Don’t Need Manners to Be Nice
June 9th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
Have you considered that there might be a universal standard? If groups of people, or even individuals, have different standards of what is good, what is right and what is wrong, does that not make it difficult to even exist together?
You ask some good questions. Is civil law (making things legal or illegal) directly related to a universal moral standard? If we take the Ten Commandments as God’s moral standard (which God has told us they are), then civil law is not in full agreement with God’s universal law.
To be a good person in God’s eyes you need to have NEVER broken any of His laws.
A key question is, how can you follow all the rules needed to be a good person? The answer is that you can’t. Have you ever told a lie? Have you ever take something that was not yours? Have you always obeyed and honored your parents? Jesus said that whoever looks at another with lust has committed adultery in their heart. Have you ever done that?
These are just four of God’s moral laws. Just as there is a penalty for breaking a civil law, there is a penalty for breaking God’s law. The penalty is death (spiritual death or what is called the lake of fire. - The Bible says, for example, that all liars have a place in the lake of fire.)
Who can be a good person based on God’s standard? No one. We have ALL broken God’s laws and must pay the penalty.
But what if someone stepped in and paid our penalty for us? We would be free, if we accepted that free gift. And it is our choice. We can accept the gift of Jesus Christ dying in our place to pay our penalty, or we can pay the penalty we owe for breaking God’s laws ourselves.
“God saved you by His special favor when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God.” - Ephesians 2:8
June 10th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Hello Brickballon,
I think you make some interesting points.
A couple of thoughts on what you’ve said -
1. Perhaps it is easier to see universal standards by looking at as many philosophies and religions as possible and seeing what, if any, similarities arise. This is where I am currently with my thinking but it is possible that you have already done this and this searching is what has brought you to the conclusion you have. If so, I’d be interested in hearing more on what you found.
2. In your thinking - i.e. using the 10 commandments as an ultimate moral standard where would things such as virginity before marriage fit in? It certainly isn’t covered within the 10 commandments so would it be expected in order to be a good person? How do you accomodate all of the other smaller rules of Christianity and the disagreements between Christian sects and have them make sense as a ultimate moral standard for all people?
3. Isn’t there something sacred in the very act of striving to be a good person? Just because one doesn’t completely attain what they are striving for doesn’t mean the journey was a waste. If I manage to make myself a better person I am sure that the people who interact with me regularly would be grateful and I don’t know that I would describe my efforts however flawed as a failure.
Anyhow, thanks for commenting and I’d be interested in anything you have to say.
June 13th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
I don’t know if you’ve ever played role-playing games, but if not, the Dungeons and Dragons game defines a character’s alignment as one of nine, of which each is one of the many possible combinations of good vs. evil and order vs. chaos. I think it covers the possibilities quite well. I’d describe myself as Chaotic Neutral.
I don’t think a universal moral standard is possible because moral values are potentially mutually exclusive. Consider the samurai practice of seppuku; they would die at their own hands to cleanse their honor. This is counter to the Christian “Thou shalt not kill”
Any universal moral standard would have to be so vague as to be practically useless. i.e., the Golden Rule. If one is raised to believe heart and soul that it’s necessary to die if one’s honor is sullied, then they would not be against killing another whose honor they believe is sullied. But what if the person they’re about to kill doesn’t hold the same belief?
Of course that example is an extreme one and doesn’t apply to humans (at least not any more as far as I know), but it illustrates the difficulty in clearly defining a rule where differing beliefs are concerned.
June 17th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Hey Mark,
That said, I checked out the link you included and this is interesting. I’ve always been fascinated with the sometime fluidity between good and evil especially when evil is dressed up (and accepted) as good and vice versa. I imagine this would be a very interesting (and potentially entertaining) way to explore this a bit further.
Sorry about the delay in responding, your comment had accidentally been sent to spam land. I’ve never played any role-playing games but had friends who did in college. All I really know about them is they sure end up taking up a lot of time…
Chaotic Neutral, huh? I took a quiz this site had and it pegged me as Neutral but I’m not so sure for a large majority of the questions there wasn’t a single response that I actually would have chosen… So is this partly why the game takes so long? You start from scratch and completely set up a personality? Is this played online? Is D&D similar to sites such as 2nd Life??
I’ve never thought of a universal moral standard quite the way you described it before…
I’d don’t know how extreme the concept of honor killings are if you are a woman in many parts of the world as it seems to happen on a fairly regular basis even here in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing
June 17th, 2007 at 6:23 pm
Jenny made me take the character alignment test too. I’m Lawful Good - My character “tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice.” It might be good, but personally sounds a little boring. Where’s my flash? Where’s my excitement?
June 17th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
Oh Erin,
You have plenty of flash and excitement good though you may be!!! But, this pretty much has you pegged.
June 17th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
I’m that easy to read, huh? Be warned - I’m going to start working on cultivating a more mysterious, dangerous side… You won’t know what hit you!
June 17th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Ohhhh, scary! Bring it on, I’ll be waiting and watching. Should be interesting.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:18 am
That test says I’m Neutral Good. LIES!!!
Yup Jenny, creating a character can take ages, then developing it even longer. It’s played offline, mainly, though there is an MMORPG set in the D&D worlds. It’s kinda like 2nd Life, but set in a fantasy world (magic and swords and monsters kind of fantasy).
It scares me that “honor” killings actually still take place. Or any kinds of killings. Melbourne was apparently chaotic today after someone shot three people in the middle of the city, then disappeared.
Erin, lawful good characters going bad make for the most interesting stories. Especially when even the Gods turn against them. Give em hell!
June 18th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
Yes, I read about the shooting in Melbourne on cnn.com last night. Glad you are still alive!!