--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ispiritkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: > > I have a different take on "being good". It can include your view > > above, which to me a sort of Ayn Rand view of altruism. > > > > However, per my prior adjacent post on being "sadhu" and "good", > from > > SBS quote, I know there is a ground state of goodness. When one is > in > > that zone, its all good. All action is permeated with love, respect, > > caring,tenderness, support, and helpfulness. Its not an intellectual > > thing. Not the result of a phd in Ethics or Religious Shastras. > > > > And its clear when someone is functioning from that zone. No fancy > > titles or labels can disguise it,or make what is not there appear. > > > I think we must agree somewhere, and maybe disagree with details. > > Not sure about what you include of the Ayn Rand view of altruism. > Although I am a fan of Randa's philosophy, I think her writings really > missed out on emotional development.
"Ruth, "doing good", in my book, comes from a place of arrogance. It implies that one knows whatu is "good" in the first place, ... but whenever I see the phrase "doing good" in this context, my neckhairs bristle and I check to make sure my weapons are handy." I may have misunderstood you. But it seemed sort of a call to "run" when someone announces they are here to do good. That is, in that view, altruists always muck it up -- either by simpleton naivite -- or more ruthless manipulation for their own ends. > When I wrote that post, along > with the C.S. Lewis quote, I was thinking along the lines of the > Louis Bromfield novel "A Good Woman". This woman was just the > opposite of what you describe above. One could see the sourness in > her face, and feel the anger seething below the surface, yet she > always did exactly the "good works" that drew approval from her > church circle. The novel painted a clear picture of emotional > hypocrisy. > > I agree with you that when someone is functioning from the zone of > goodness, "No fancy titles or labels can disguise it,or make what is > not there appear." However, that doesn't make it "all good". I have > seen very well-meaning people take actions that are simply > misinformed.* Action is quite a concrete thing, and translation from > the emotional/spiritual state of goodness to the physical state of > action sometimes gets garbled. > > ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ > > I use the term "misguided" so often my children asked me once, "Is > everybody who disagrees with you misguided?" ;) >
