Then it wouldn’t be kindness would it. 
I would say that it is stupidity that kills, not kindness. With stupidity, one presumes something to be kindness even when it clearly isn’t.
good work james…my idea for this thread was to focus on how we treat other persons…
all this god stuff doesn’t really matter that much…
Live and let live.
That all leads always to the same imperative, namely Kant’s Categorical Imperative.
The first formulation: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.”
The second formulation: “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.”
The thrid formulation: “Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends.”
The first formulation of the Categorical Imperative appears similar to the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim, ethical code or morality.
The Golden Rule (in its positive form) says: “Treat others how you wish to be treated.” One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (directive form).
The Golden Rule (in its negative form) says: “Do not impose on others what you do not wish for yourself.” One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (cautionary form, also known as the Silver Rule).
Kindness is arguably the most noble attribute in the realm of human relationships … relationships between man and his environment … man and animals … in short … man and his world. However, seems it has been trampled by individualism, ambition, competition and the deification of prosperity.
St Augustine’s suggestion that prosperity inevitably leads to depravity may turn out to be accurate.
St Augustine writes in his book “City of God” … “now ambition would not prevail but amongst a people wholly corrupted with covetousness and luxury. And the people are always infected with these two contagions, by the means of affluent prosperity”. You are depraved by prosperity…”
This degeneration of kindness in human relationships may not be such a bad thing. Perhaps it will serve as a negative teacher. Seems people are more inclined to embrace change in times of serious adversity.
A well known Chinese maxim … “Inevitable reversal of the extreme” … may be relevant here.
Any improvement of the current status of ‘kindness’ in the world must start with imagination. As more and more people imagine a kind world … the world will become a kinder place.
Oh no. Live and let live. I quite another thing completely.
Kant offers himself to behave only in ways that he would find acceptable if it were a overall rule for everyone.
“Live and let live” is a plea for negligence. It suggests that I can do what the fuck I want, and so can others.
It does not even have the codicil “do no harm.” That’s not what Kant had in mind.
Kant definitely did have a keen set of moral rules that he was able to comply with, and willing to impose those rules on all others, right up to the hilt of the third formulation.
I did not say that “live and let live” is the same, but that it leads (leads!) to Kant’s Categorial imperative.
Augustinus is right: Prosperity inevitably leads to depravity.
we don’t have to prove anything about kindness…
it is something that happens…
this is not science…
how important is kindness…
Read some ILP posts and you will know how important kindness is.
I’ll repeat a Wiccan commandment–Do as you will so long as it harms no one.
I like it but it sounds unrealistic
So does the Golden Rule!
it depends on how you look at the wiccan thing or the golden rule
They are really not all that different.
That’s what he was saying, James.
But the chocolates and cake things was stupidity or more to the point, simply a lack of awareness. But sometimes thinking we are being kind when we are actually causing harm is not so much stupidity but wrongful interpretation. Maybe that’s the same as a lack of awareness too.
In order to have a thread on kindness, I think we have to define it as we mean it and how we don’t mean it. Give examples of it.
Kindness is not always trying to be nice…no matter what. There is a distinction between being kind and allowing one’s self to be treated as a doormat.
Kindness includes a gentle attitude toward persons and things. Morality, in which kindness is possible, is ecological. How we react to what is not us, in the physical sense, defines who we are., in a spiritual sense. We must love one another or die. Nothing else makes sense. See Aldous Huxley’s “Island” for an example of ecological morality.
duplicate
[we must love one another or die]—that sounds pretty extreme…I like kind and gentle if possible…
It’s a fact. If we do not learn to love one another, we will surely die. Read W. H. Auden’s thoughtful poem, “Sept. 1939”, written on the eve of WWII.
would [love one another] include an adequate defensive military force…and a good police force