On the train home this evening I was fumbling over whether or not there is a right way and a wrong way of doing things.
As I was getting off the train, the conductor told me to have a good night. Normally I would have smiled and said thanks and kept moving. But tonight I was paying special attention to whether people were doing things the right way or the wrong way – so I kept my mouth shut and just observed. What I observed was that the conductor didn’t seem to care at all about what he said or its effect, and this struck me as the wrong way of doing things. When you tell someone to have a good night, you should mean it. You shouldn’t just do it because it’s your job. What is wrong with this guy? That made me angry.
There is a problem with this story, a universal problem whose currents I believe run deep. The problem is that when I saw an action that was done the wrong way, I assumed that there was something wrong with the person who performed the action. That was my mistake, and I’ve witnessed myself and others make it time and time again. When the conductor told me to have a good night in the wrong kind of way - there was nothing wrong with the conductor himself. He was acting the same way any of us would have acted had we been in his shoes (is that not always the case?). Yet I made the mistake of thinking that there was something wrong with him, and that made me angry. Most people wrongly attribute the cause of their anger to external forces - they tend not to realize that it is their own ignorance which creates the anger within them.
My message tonight is simple: Judge the action, not the actor. That is the right way of doing things.
What are we conveying when saying “good night” anyways? I think it’s “I hope you have a good night.” This signals that one is extending a branch of friendship by saying that they desire the other’s wellbeing. Basically, saying “good night,” or “hello,” or any kind of other greeting is a way of getting across the message that no ill will is intended.
One relevant thing,
The action is a characteristic of the actor. One’s actions are in a way not any different than the actors facial features, and in many ways the action is more telling of the actor’s character than one’s facial features. For me, at least, saying judge the action and not the actor is as silly as saying judge the face, but not the person to whom the face belongs.
This is impossible, Dirt. We could not survive in our daily lives without judging whether to eat the toothpick or the slice of pizza, whether it’s best to take the car or walk, whether to socialize with a suspecious character or not. To be conscious is to judge.
Ultimately, I agree. I am one of those people who believe that everything is perfect and that all of the “problems” in the world result from people not understanding this fact. Nonetheless, judging those who are judging can be a useful tool, as long as we remember that ultimately there is nothing to judge. In that respect, life is one big beautiful paradox.
The right way is to understand why, the wrong way is to presume why. You conductor was probably zoning out in his mind. His words were reflex from habit. Hundreds of people everyday in and out entering and exiting his train. His reflex was a polite nonconfrontational habit. His job is to get you on and off peacefully and quickly. How could he truly care when he does not see your face? You can’t expect a person in that type of position to see you as a person. People moving is his job. The cashier at a store is the same, A police officer, a secretary. When serving the masses is your job you tend to not identify the individual , that would muck your job up and cause emotional stress.
If we understand why a person does something then we can understand right from wrong. If we assume/presume by just the action then we will most likely assume/presume the wrong answer.
Lets say you witness a person shooting a dog or beating another person. First instinct is to presume wrong in this social era. Why? Why is it not our first intinct that the dog or the person needed shooting or a beating? The dog could be ill or it just attacked a child , the person getting beaten could have harmed someone drastically. but, those are not first in our head. We do not bother to ask why. Why do we not ask why?
Absolutly. I think this kind of thinking is so important, more so then what I was saying. However, what I was saying didn’t contradict this. Its always important to understand why - but that doesn’t mean there is never any room for improvement. The conductor wasn’t doing anything wrong. But meaning what you’re saying is always better than not meaning what you’re saying. I don’t fault him at all. In my story, I did. But I also acknowledged that was a mistake.
Would you have prefered him to say “Hurry it up and Get the F**k off my train!” which is probably what he would have prefered to say. How would you have reacted? Many times when we are hypersocially active we have to say what we do not mean. Someone with fewer items may reach a checkout stand at the same time I do. If I were to say “get out of my way my time is more valuable then yours. Or Just nod and say something polite to let them go ahead. Which one would cause less confrontation and problems? We cannot always mean what we say in society. It would not be nice or better it would cause a whole lot of social problems. We can think it would be better but, the reality is we would just be causing ourself so many confrontations that we would get bogged down. Its self preservation in action. We take the easier way out of a situation. The wrong way would be to say what we mean. Picture a busy commercial street with everyone saying exactly what they mean to everyone else. Keep in mind everyone thinks of themselves first and will generally always think they are right. I would run the other way should I see a street like that. Remember the line from a Fleetwood Mack song. " Give me lies , give me sweet little lies” I can’t recall the title to the song but, socially lies are acceptable in order to preserve peace. Truth is confrontational.
You have stated this very well. However I believe that you have only stated so because it is neither common nor easy. God does not judge and we are part and parcel of him. We are His children. And so, just as we have obtained characteristics from him such as beauty and intelligence, we have also, in the same way, gained what to us seems ‘ugly’ aspects - both in a physical and mental form.
When a saintly person spots a poor man, he immediately realizes this. This IS judgment also. I believe living in this world, that truly is avoidable. Even if one can neither see, hear, smell, or touch - he is still constantly SEARCHING for something around him to judge. It is human nature.
However the meaning I was attempting to state was to see everything from one light. A POSITIVE light. And so, although you will continue to - in terms - judge, you will be judging through a positive perspective. And so, everything will be positive. It is as if looking through color-stained windows. The several colors shining upon the floor are created from one light. Consider this light positive, and the stained colors on the floor - the world. All belongs to one light source, but appear different.
Judge the world in that way. Through a positive perspective. And all will seemingly be Perfect.
An optimist, eh? There’s nothing wrong with that as long as one’s optimism isn’t unrealistic. For example, if you’re aboard a sinking ship, you can look at the bright side of the situation and hope for the best if you’d like–in my opinion this is very helpful towards survival–but going off the deep end and imagining yourself on a beach having a nice time is not very healthy, even though it might seem pleasant for a bit of time.
i understand your story but my first impression is that what you observed in him was dissapointment in not recieving a returned greeting.
Well the ending turned out better than i expected.
I have studied psychology, and this is one of the well proven things i learned:
When we judge ourselves, we largely blame our own actions on the external world, whereas when we judge other people, we tend to blame them alone and not the external world or external influence. (which as you noticed, is unjust)
You hit the nail on the head, although the nail has already been driven lol.
Would you have prefered him to say “Hurry it up and Get the F**k off my train!” which is probably what he would have prefered to say. How would you have reacted? Many times when we are hypersocially active we have to say what we do not mean. Someone with fewer items may reach a checkout stand at the same time I do. If I were to say “get out of my way my time is more valuable then yours. Or Just nod and say something polite to let them go ahead. Which one would cause less confrontation and problems? We cannot always mean what we say in society. It would not be nice or better it would cause a whole lot of social problems. We can think it would be better but, the reality is we would just be causing ourself so many confrontations that we would get bogged down. Its self preservation in action. We take the easier way out of a situation. The wrong way would be to say what we mean. Picture a busy commercial street with everyone saying exactly what they mean to everyone else. Keep in mind everyone thinks of themselves first and will generally always think they are right. I would run the other way should I see a street like that. 
