If you don’t agree with the concept of good or bad people, you dont have to answer just down vote. If you think a person is good or bad based on where they were born and live you don’t have to answer just down vote.
By how they talk about people who aren’t part of the conversation. Someone focuses a lot on heaping contempt on former coworkers and romantic partners, it’s a bad sign.
Their ability to return their shopping cart to the corral
The true litmus test.
Small addition: while nobody is watching. Or at least they think nobody is watching.
How do they treat those that are “beneath” them? Customer service workers, pets, kids, etc. Anyone that they should have some sort of authority over.
THIS is the answer. You can tell a lot about a person on how they treat people that they cannot use to make themselves richer or look better.
When you die, you will bring no money with you. You will bring no material items. Your words will be forgotten. Your name will eventually crawl its way back into the abyss of non-existence from where it came along with all the others. The ONLY thing that will have mattered in the slightest in your measly and momentary existence is how you made others feel. To live a life with any sort of self-importance is to rob yourself of the only thing that matters in the entirety of the known universe.
“There was definitely a more virtuous path to take here, why didn’t they? Are they just that stupid? Emotionally overwhelmed and unable to be righteous? Or are they in full awareness and capacities, but they just don’t care?”
The answer gives me a data point, and with a collection of points (fewer are needed the further the decisions are from virtue) I make my assessment.
How people behave towards animals is a really big one for me. If someone doesn’t like cats or dogs or any sort of critters for any reason other than a traumatic childhood attack memory I assume something is deeply wrong with them. I realize plenty of bad people don’t hate animals, but I assume if you do then you can’t be good.
My mom dislikes animals but she isn’t mean to them, she just avoids having anything to do with them
Ocular patdown
If they harm other people, intentionally or not, physically, emotionally, etc. And they could stop but choose not to, then often they are a bad person.
If they lie all the time, they are probably willing to do other awful things as well.
If they are willing to steal outside of a desperate situation, if they treat someone who’s been good to them awful, if they treat those beneath them awfuly, if they judge based on location, race, etnicity, etc. If they put whatever fantasy world they live in, over reality (antivaxxers and such, and yes religious people).
If they co-operated with Jeffrey Epstein, they only belong in the woodchipper.
Easy. By what they say and do.
I assume everyone is good by default, and I’ll usually let a tasteless joke slide once, because we all occasionally put our foot in mouth.
If their actions and words don’t mesh with my own moral compass, they aren’t a person I associate with any more than necessary.
By their behavior.
Although philosophers who embrace moral realism will have different views, my takeaway is that it is much harder to be a virtuous moral agent than the layperson assumes.
That said, if I find that a person often puts their own interests above those of everyone else, this is a good indication of questionable character.
This you?
This is why everyone hates moral philosophy professors
Ha! In a few ways, yes.
It’s not all or nothing, and small things are universally tolerable. Gluttony isn’t good but most people have someone fat/obese they love and even admire. Excess vanity isn’t good but to a certain degree most women are somewhat vain and that doesn’t make them bad (and men enjoy looking at women when they’re done up too), right? It’s impossible to be perfect, and virtue will be disregarded at times, but I think it’s not that difficult to be above the threshold we all naturally understand (unless you’re an amoral perspectivist): don’t lie, don’t cheat, don’t be coercive or aggressive, don’t mistreat others, take your vows seriously (raise your kids and try to make things work with your partner), be generous when possible, etc etc. And you can always repent and make amends when you fail too, people understand.
If they try to ingratiate themselves too aggressively, if they make way too good eye contact and smile so big and are effusively positive, and they make the hairs on the back of my neck crawl, I know it’s highly likely I’m interacting with a sociopath or psychopath.
Everyone that’s normal has a chance to be good or evil and it changes over time.
If the person hits the trigger points above though I know they aren’t going to be a stable actor to deal with because they will lack empathy, be utterly self serving, and never feel guilt for their actions.
I’ve encountered quite a few of these people in my years and they often are in positions of authority because they are really good at fooling and manipulating people.
I don’t know if this is good or bad but I definitely try to avoid or at least ring fence people like this when I encounter them.
I mainly believe that most people are a product of their circumstances and how they have decided to cope with their experiences. But imo, a good person regularly does things that benefit others without any benefit to themselves. Especially if they’re not obligated to do it. Good people are kind (but not a pushover) to everyone, even if someone is unkind to them.
On the other end of the spectrum, bad people do things that hurt others even if it is of no benefit to themselves. They are unkind even if it takes nothing off of them to be kind.
Their levels of empathy, their relationship with their own ego, and, similarly, their levels of selfishness / egotistic/ egocentric. That’s the core that drives, they’ll make decisions on who to betray from that core, with no care for others, they become quite dangerous to be around. That said something people are good at pretending they have empathy and aren’t egocentric, but if you wait and watch, pretend always has cracks to see through. And i don’t mean small moments of overwhelm. I mean, polar opposite behaviours that seem outside their morals, when not in an extreme emotion. You will usually see little things around the edges, and your instinct is to excuse it away, because it doesn’t fit the narrative, don’t do that bit. Little things around the edges might look like casually stealing, possibly just small things, sometimes even from friends, jealousy or a hatred for someone for no apparent reason other than they’re good at something the person in question is, too. Wanting a lot of attention, without giving anyone else room in the spotlight, or giving less and less room for others in the spotlight, until it’s all about them. Passing blame, it’s always someone elses fault, or excuses for everything they do that they feel are a reason to be able to do the poor behaviour, rather than taking responsibility, learning and growing. Unable to metabolise failure, at all. If you look up fixed and growth mindset, (Carol Dweck) narcissistic types, always have a fixed mindset. Where they’re Unable to utilise mistakes or failures to learn and grow, and believe that you are inherently born good at things or not, rather than practice at anything making you able to be an expert at something.
I cannot remember the reference right now, but it’s said that anyone can become “genius” level at something, if they just put 7 years of practice into it. “Bad” people, practice being like everyone else, they are very good at learning what you want to see, and mirroring that, for a time, it’s not something anyone can hold up for very long, but that said, I’ve seen it held up for a year, odd, at times.
If you wait, don’t get enmeshed with someone too quickly, they usually try to move fast to enmesh you, and remember that a lot of what you see in anyone around you, is what your brain imagines is there, you put a “persona” on people, all people. What’s in everyone is a complex mix of a different set of morals, and emotional maturity, privilege and perspective of the world that’s shaped by their unique upbringing, surroundings and environment. Even two siblings can have very different upbringing, surroundings and environment. And everyone has bad and good, in them. What you need to assess is the harm they could or do cause you and what you need to do to keep safe, keeping in mind that psychological, emotional and verbal abuse, are as harmful as physical abuse. And then decide what level of involvement is safe for you.
I don’t think people can be divided into good and bad, I think it’s more of a spectrum. I generally judge how good a person is by the virtues they show in their actions. I like when people take accountability for their actions, are kind to others, do what’s right even if it’s difficult, are honest, and their actions align with what they claim to believe.
