Ask Lemmy

How do they treat those that are "beneath" them? Customer service workers, pets, kids, etc. Anyone that they should have some sort of authority over.

If they harm other people, intentionally or not, physically, emotionally, etc. And they could stop but choose not to, then often they are a bad person.

Easy. By what they say and do.

I assume everyone is good by default, and I'll usually let a tasteless joke slide once, because we all occasionally put our foot in mouth.

If their actions and words don't mesh with my own moral compass, they aren't a person I associate with any more than necessary.

Although philosophers who embrace moral realism will have different views, my takeaway is that it is much harder to be a virtuous moral agent than the layperson assumes.

That said, if I find that a person often puts their own interests above those of everyone else, this is a good indication of questionable character.

If they lie all the time, they are probably willing to do other awful things as well.

If they are willing to steal outside of a desperate situation, if they treat someone who's been good to them awful, if they treat those beneath them awfuly, if they judge based on location, race, etnicity, etc. If they put whatever fantasy world they live in, over reality (antivaxxers and such, and yes religious people).

If they co-operated with Jeffrey Epstein, they only belong in the woodchipper.

Empathy

It's all about empathy. If they lack empathy or kindness then fuck them. I don't want them in my life and I prefer not to interact with them.

Ocular patdown

Their ability to return their shopping cart to the corral

Louis Rossman had a video years ago that really got me looking at people differently. An obvious sign for him is how they treat animals. animals sadly are often the ultimate litmus test for ones morality. I find that respecting an animal, its boundries and its emotions is a thing only possible when youve developed a (imo) basic sense of empathy, that for pets and animals cant be expressed verbally.

Think of times when a person was trying to force an animals to behave in a particular way purely for self intrest. Or if someone you know outright denies the complex emotions of animals. I am by no means an animal rights activist and i often can be heard yelling at my dog to stop barking or etc. But i think even if we "own" them most good people dont think of pets as propperty, status symbols, or entertainment.

the moment i see behavior like this I try to correct and if they actively fight me on it or make no attempt to improve. I will disconnect from them entirely, not worth it. If thats how you treat family, i dont want to see how you treat friends.

If society was only copies of this person, would it be better or worse to live in than current society?

How people behave towards animals is a really big one for me. If someone doesn't like cats or dogs or any sort of critters for any reason other than a traumatic childhood attack memory I assume something is deeply wrong with them. I realize plenty of bad people don't hate animals, but I assume if you do then you can't be good.

By their ability to empathize.

The fundamental attribution error explains why we perceive people to be good or bad.

I know you said to just downvote, but I really strongly believe the world would be a much better place if people tried to understand the motivations of others, rather than trying to categorise them as good or bad people.

If they are willing to hurt other people for their own benefit or for no reason. Or if they are willing to help someone else do that. (Like how republicans voted Trump into office to keep him out of prison.)

In addition to some of the other criteria mentioned, some other indicators of a bad person are:

• Using bad-faith argument techniques, such as tone policing
• Endorsing or demanding conformity for conformity's sake

Through their actions.

Most people are good. Most people forget to be kind to others sometimes.

Some people forget to be kind to others more. I kinda don't like that.

Some people need to cause others discomfort to feel like they are in control of their lives. I dislike that.

Some people feel that they have the right to or even should cause others discomfort because they have some kind of birthright granted by their religion, how aggressive their ancestors were, or some perception that they've worked harder than others. I feel that such people should either be rigorously reeducated or in some way removed from access to other humans entirely.

Their levels of empathy, their relationship with their own ego, and, similarly, their levels of selfishness / egotistic/ egocentric. That's the core that drives, they'll make decisions on who to betray from that core, with no care for others, they become quite dangerous to be around. That said something people are good at pretending they have empathy and aren't egocentric, but if you wait and watch, pretend always has cracks to see through. And i don't mean small moments of overwhelm. I mean, polar opposite behaviours that seem outside their morals, when not in an extreme emotion. You will usually see little things around the edges, and your instinct is to excuse it away, because it doesn't fit the narrative, don't do that bit. Little things around the edges might look like casually stealing, possibly just small things, sometimes even from friends, jealousy or a hatred for someone for no apparent reason other than they're good at something the person in question is, too. Wanting a lot of attention, without giving anyone else room in the spotlight, or giving less and less room for others in the spotlight, until it's all about them. Passing blame, it's always someone elses fault, or excuses for everything they do that they feel are a reason to be able to do the poor behaviour, rather than taking responsibility, learning and growing. Unable to metabolise failure, at all. If you look up fixed and growth mindset, (Carol Dweck) narcissistic types, always have a fixed mindset. Where they're Unable to utilise mistakes or failures to learn and grow, and believe that you are inherently born good at things or not, rather than practice at anything making you able to be an expert at something.

I cannot remember the reference right now, but it's said that anyone can become "genius" level at something, if they just put 7 years of practice into it. "Bad" people, practice being like everyone else, they are very good at learning what you want to see, and mirroring that, for a time, it's not something anyone can hold up for very long, but that said, I've seen it held up for a year, odd, at times.

If you wait, don't get enmeshed with someone too quickly, they usually try to move fast to enmesh you, and remember that a lot of what you see in anyone around you, is what your brain imagines is there, you put a "persona" on people, all people. What's in everyone is a complex mix of a different set of morals, and emotional maturity, privilege and perspective of the world that's shaped by their unique upbringing, surroundings and environment. Even two siblings can have very different upbringing, surroundings and environment. And everyone has bad and good, in them. What you need to assess is the harm they could or do cause you and what you need to do to keep safe, keeping in mind that psychological, emotional and verbal abuse, are as harmful as physical abuse. And then decide what level of involvement is safe for you.

I don't judge persons (because I'm not in their head), I look at their actions.

Also, I tend to steer away from the 'good' vs 'bad' (persons, thoughts, sexuality, religion, and so on) that were and still way too often used to hurt people one doesn't like or agree with.

two things.

1. how they treat other people
2. what they don't say

first one is pretty easy. don't treat other people like pieces of shit, or you're a piece of shit.

second one, when they see something happening that is wrong and do nothing. you're a piece of shit.

By their behavior.

are their actions based on how they benefit them?

By how they talk about people who aren't part of the conversation. Someone focuses a lot on heaping contempt on former coworkers and romantic partners, it's a bad sign.

If a person operates as if nothing is unconditional and they expect something in return or else you are deemed worthless, they're a fucking cunt.

If a person continually makes a situation about themselves even when it's 100% not, that's a red flag.

If they whine and complain to get what they want or have others do for them, they're a bad person.

Yelling at a newborn baby in a punishing manner as if they have any understanding of anything.

I assume everyone is good untill they give me a reason to think otherwise. However, for me to know that someone truly is a good person takes years of knowing and interacting with them.

"There was definitely a more virtuous path to take here, why didn't they? Are they just that stupid? Emotionally overwhelmed and unable to be righteous? Or are they in full awareness and capacities, but they just don't care?"

The answer gives me a data point, and with a collection of points (fewer are needed the further the decisions are from virtue) I make my assessment.

Heh. I assume everyone is a bad person unless they immensely prove that they aren't. they can't do lots of drugs, lead chaotic lives, be anti-intellectual, be a gossip, be greedy, a control freak, have an immoral job, use religion as a cudgel, have no integrity, be overly optimistic, have lots of kids, etc. etc.