Di, comin' through with the ideas (someone give her a raise). Here's what she's got for us:
1. Try to be good people.
2. Be nice
3. Remain open.
Let's start by picking each of these apart; we'll try to learn what they mean, and then we'll talk about if and how we can accomplish each of these goals and what the intended or unintended outcomes of each might be.
1. What is being "good" to people?
2 What is being "nice" to people?
3 What does it mean to "remain open"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Okay. I'll bite. I think I can get behind this...
1) Be good people.
What does being "good" mean? What does it mean to be a good guitar player, or a good samaritan, or a good bacteria, for that matter? It means being effective. Being effective means deriving maximum benefit for minimum effort. Live your life in a way that you provide the maximum benefit to yourself and those around you while requiring the minimum effort, and you're being good.
2. Be nice
Being nice is often (but, not always) the most effective way to interact with people. I think being "good" means being as nice as humanly possible, but understanding when being "not-so-nice" is more effective. Nice is my default to approach each interaction, but I will work my way away from nice as the situation dictates. That being said, it's a whole lot easier getting your cable turned on if the customer service rep is on your side.
3. Remain open
Hallelujah to this. All too often people find what works once and stick to it well beyond its shelf life. Each new situation in life has its own unique set of requirements. Listen. Don't listen for what's familiar so you can spit back what you already know; listen for what's different so you have the opportunity to ask questions and become even more effective.
I think I would rephrase it like this: In life, strive for efficacy, edification, and evolution.
I call it D's three E's to a better world... The native Americans, however, call it "maize."
We'll call that D's Tripartite Efficiency Model. Thanks, bigsoda; or, can I call you "BS"?
BS is probably more appropriate. Maybe Art School has trained me too well in rationalization...
It's not really about efficiency - it's about effectiveness. Pleasantries devoid of purpose are just empty gestures. Punishment devoid of purpose is just evil.
We're all driving this universe to its logical conclusion together. We need to keep our eyes on the road and our hands upon the wheel...
I am the Lizard King!!!
That's not BS, BS! It's pointed and purposeful. What is the substance of "nice" and "good"? Is it good to be nice to the cable rep if you're calling to cancel your service before you move to a city served by a different company? Unless you expect a merger that would effect your future service, there's no efficacy in being nice to him or her. Is there intrinsic good in being nice, aside from its utility? Is it its own end?
Alright... Well here's where the right-wing "Constituency of Me" butts up against my leftist "Constituency of We..." If I'm nice to that rep whom I will never speak to again in my final interaction with him/her, he or she may be just a bit more willing to deal with your sour attitude when you call to complain about being overcharged on your bill. That will probably lend itself to a more peaceful resolution of your dispute. If that's not efficacy, I don't know what is.
The point being that if an interaction is not a zero-sum game by definition, the only winning result is for both parties to strive for a positive-sum outcome. I think reciprocal altruism will bring us a long way toward the promised land (I don't know what that is, but I'm pretty sure it's not Hammond, IN).
I'm going to amend my 3 E's ton include the following:
Some interactions in life are levers; when you push up on your end of a lever, the other end goes down - if you must do so, do so with wisdom.
Did you pull that addition from some ancient sex text? Very profound.
Seriously, I understand why you added the "levers in life".
What about an uneven outcome? What if you're a complete dick to the cable guy (for no good reason) and he's really nice to you in spite of your dickedness? Do you measure the 'good' or 'success' of the outcome in the whole (yours and his behavior), or do you measure it individually and find that one person's actions were more good than the other's? Assume the cable guy doesn't care about keeping his job, and is just good to you without threat of losing that job; how do you account for his behavior? Why would he act that way?
Dog: This cable person sounds smart. There is rarely any percentage in being a dick to someone. ..especially to their face. That's one more person you are probably going to have to face off against when you can least afford it.
I think it is almost always in someone's interest to be nice even in the face of aggression. If it can be done, meet hostility with a smile.
Hate the cable, not the guy.
Totally hate the cable...
But since I offered these tenets of wisdom I thought it would be fun to weigh in. I believe that trying to “be good people” means trying to be the person you were meant to be. This differs by person, of course. For me it means trying to live the simple golden rule. I find “good people” to also include a distinct taste in music and movies and literature, I don’t care what genre you’re into, but have an opinion for fuck’s sake! Also, a great sense of humor helps truckloads. You know…good people!
Be nice to people: Totally the Golden Rule here. I certainly believe that you will eventually have to answer for what you have done and that is between you and your Maker. To me this equates to smiling at kids that look scared in the hospital, helping parents out with directions, being present and willing to help those who ask for it – friends, family, etc... This does not always result in rewards. Sometimes people that try to be “nice” are taken for suckers. This sucks. So be it. It still allows me to sleep at night knowing I tried to be nice.
Remain open: Willingness to grow, change and adapt based on others' wisdom or differences.
Then again, what the hell do I know?
I think we're on the same page here, Di. Old Dog is just trying to drag us into some sort of Machiavellian "ends justify the means" argument. >:)
earl nightingale called it reasonableness. Integrity with a sense of humor. treating people like they are the most important people on earth, because they are. there certainly seems to be a lack of reasonableness lately. i think it's a cultural thing that filters down from the top. but if we're aware that it's missing, then we can take steps to change it. but is this what the old dude was ranting about?
Duh. I never got the bigsoda-BS thing before.
I'm gonna use that.
Oh, and I'm trying to be good, but it doesn't always work.
Hey! I'm not trying to draw anyone into any particular argument! I just want to know what you think about it.
Dude... anytine you feed someone's words back to them in quotes, you're trying to drag them into an argumen. Or, perhaps, you "just want to know what you think about it."
Upon reading my last comment sober, I'm not sure what I was going for there...
I think of all the three components offered - "Remain Open" may be the most important. One could say this is being awake, listening responding to the situation - not on the basis of some bullshit formula but because you really "hear" and try to understand the situation...
....and, to the best of your ability you respond in an honest way.
I failed at this recently and have been sort of kicking myself. NOT BEATING MYSELF UP (that's the work of the Devil) but honestly trying to help ME learn, the next time I am in this situation I will try to listen and respond to the situation "more correctly" - or in a way that won't leave me feeling like total shit.
There is a response psalm they do at Newman from time to time
"If today you hear God's voice, harden not your heart"
and understanding this, responding to it, remaining open in the way suggested by the end of Ladi Di & Big soda's observations is a big part of living...no matter what your orientation religious affiliation etc....
I'll be back.
Well done, edp-inator.
Of COURSE I'm trying to you into an argument. Just not the one you think.
The golden rule is all you need here: do unto others as you'd have them do unto you.
The more we analyze things, increase information, watch tv, etc., the more we complicate this simple, effective tenet.
Post a Comment