Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably true.

Personally, I think you should put your family first in all personal decisions (spending your own money, etc.) and put fairness first in your official decisions (job, voting).

So I’d absolutely pay for my kid to go to a private school, but I wouldn’t hire my nephew over a more qualified candidate.

This is pretty much how I approach things too. Anyway, generally speaking I think I'd say instead that most people care primarily about themselves, family, and friends, rather than only. I think most people are pretty decent and able to think about others beyond their immediate circle, even if there's a gradation of priorities.

Yes. I think people are capable of caring about others outside their immediate circle, but it's easiest when your loved ones are comfortable and doing fine. People don't prioritize strangers to the detriment of their loved ones, and if they think the well being of their loved ones is threatened, more altruistic principles go out the window. Hence NIMBY, and people fighting tooth and nail to get their kid into a good college even as they admit that current structures are flawed and should perhaps be changed.

This. Really well encapsulated, PP!

Anonymous wrote:True for Republicans for sure

Not true of me or most of my family and friends. Not sure about the general population, but I'd like to think not.

I think it's good to care about yourself and put yourself first (who else will?), but that we live in a culture that goes about this wrong.

Most people are insecure and feel shame all the time. So "caring about themselves" often takes the form of doing things to suppress their insecurities and avoid shame. Often they do this by shifting shame onto others via judgment, passive aggression, condescension, and failure to find empathy. They do all of this unknowingly, which then causes their children and other loved ones to feel insecure and ashamed. It ripples out on everyone.

Caring about other people requires you to start by genuinely loving and caring about yourself. You have to work through your shame and confront your insecurity and finally recognize that you are a worthwhile human deserving of love and acceptance. Then you can offer that to others, especially your children. If you instill these values in children, they grow up to be adults who feel secure in their place in the world and aware of their inherent worth, and that makes it easier for them to care about others. And so on.

Most people are trapped in the insecurity/shame cycle though. They think they are caring for others but they are mostly just running from their own demons.

Anonymous wrote:Yes and no. I think most people want to care about others and invest in others, but when all is said and done, most people only have the capacity (mental, physical, monetary, time wise, whatever) to take care of themselves and their friends and family.

Agree.

True for Republicans for sure

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably true.

Personally, I think you should put your family first in all personal decisions (spending your own money, etc.) and put fairness first in your official decisions (job, voting).

So I’d absolutely pay for my kid to go to a private school, but I wouldn’t hire my nephew over a more qualified candidate.

This is pretty much how I approach things too. Anyway, generally speaking I think I'd say instead that most people care primarily about themselves, family, and friends, rather than only. I think most people are pretty decent and able to think about others beyond their immediate circle, even if there's a gradation of priorities.

Yes. I think people are capable of caring about others outside their immediate circle, but it's easiest when your loved ones are comfortable and doing fine. People don't prioritize strangers to the detriment of their loved ones, and if they think the well being of their loved ones is threatened, more altruistic principles go out the window. Hence NIMBY, and people fighting tooth and nail to get their kid into a good college even as they admit that current structures are flawed and should perhaps be changed.

No. Many of have circles of people we care about — from an inner circle of close family and friends, all the way to larger, outermost rings that for some people include humankind, or all living things, or the a universe. Some people really do make decisions taking into account future generations. We don’t treat all of these individuals the same, or give all of these circles the same priority, but the caring and consideration may extend way beyond one’s personal circle of family and close friends.

I disagree. There would be no charity, no religion, no Peace Corps, no doctors without boarders, no habitat for humanity, etc. if your statement were true.

I think most people care about people outside of their family but the question is will you act on that when it matters.

True. Although the pandemic is showing it is mostly just themselves

Most people care about what other people think of them.

Anonymous wrote:Yes and no. I think most people want to care about others and invest in others, but when all is said and done, most people only have the capacity (mental, physical, monetary, time wise, whatever) to take care of themselves and their friends and family.

I agree with this. I care about others. When I am financially comfortable I give money to charity, but when money is tight I reserve it for my family. It doesn't mean I don't care anymore, but I prioritize those closest to me.

Not "only". I have an obligation to my immediate family and myself to advocate for my immediate family and myself. I also care about others and do what I can to contribute positively to society, whether through volunteering, donating, or frankly, in how I vote.

Most people only care about themselves. Some care about family and friends, others don't. We live in a Me culture.