We Must Defend Kindness

...

I guess there is no saying about any other positive trait like "Good and stupid - brothers". There is a common belief that kindness it can be exaggerated, that good people neglect their own interests and end up giving more to others than to themselves. Here, there is clearly a belief that a smart person knows that (material) interests are more important than kindness, or caring for others, which leads to the encouragement of selfishness and the destruction of solidarity.

Goodness is often doubted, hidden motives for good deeds are sought. In some cases they do exist, more or less obviously. Some people are manipulative and hide their bad intentions behind favors, flattery, false friendship or support. And sometimes it's really hard to make a difference and protect yourself, even highly developed capacities for understanding intentions don't help. The saddest situation is with people who were severely traumatized in childhood, who see any generosity as a cause for alarm. However, one must not lose sight of the fact that goodness exists and that, regardless of everything, it should always be encouraged and believed in.

A LIFE LOADED WITH KINDNESS

Kindness is sometimes seen as a consolation for those who are not very popular, so saying that someone is "very good" actually hides "she is really ugly", that is, "what a weakling". I guess it is more difficult to define, but it is still worth something, and we attribute it when we are benevolent or feel sorry for someone.

It is unusual when someone repeats to himself how good a person he is. It can be simple boasting or the above-mentioned manipulativeness, but also a much more dangerous tendency for someone to convince himself with words and try to maintain control over accumulated aggressiveness.

Finally, the problem with kindness is that interesting stories are difficult to weave around it. Newspapers sell blood, movies are made about "psychopaths", and there is nothing televised about goodness. It could even be said that many perceive kindness and good people as boring, too predictable, harmless, something like Tolstoy's happy families.

All the mentioned problems are simply the consequences of pessimism or cynicism. Life is full of goodness, it exists, you just need to pay attention to it. There are entire professions focused on helping and supporting, volunteers of all kinds, associations that organize humanitarian actions, dedicated parents, teachers, mentors, and everyone surely has some examples of significant help, or at least words of encouragement, from an unknown person. Some people spontaneously feel that you can only get what you give and that what you selfishly keep for yourself rots and becomes a useless burden.

ON THE SIDE OF SELFISHNESS

Although I'm sure many do philosophy would not agree, I suggest that, at least briefly, we think of kindness as one's capacity not to lose sight of the well-being of others, as a trait, to a certain extent, the opposite of selfishness. When we meet others, we don't forget to ask ourselves what they need, what we can give them, where to direct them. If we have friends, and even more so if we have children, we think not only of their immediate needs but also of what would support their further development. And when no one asked for anything, we collect what would be useful to someone or we think of proposals and solutions.

I can't resist the possibility of seeing kindness as closely related to empathy. On the one hand, through high emotional empathy, "good heart", warmth thanks to which some people make us feel better even before they do anything. And on the other, with a strong motivation to delve into the life, problems and needs of another person, where, again, just listening and a strong desire to understand can mean more than advice or actions.

In all these situations, the good deed is the one that brings me nothing. I did something for someone, knowing that I would get nothing in return, without even thinking about it. Ideally, and as the Gospels recommend, not only would others not need to know about it, but we ourselves should not, even within ourselves, particularly deal with it. Kindness should become so common and almost natural to us, that we do not brag about it either to ourselves or to others.

In this context, I have the impression that many people do not see the power and importance humanitarian of work. I've never met anyone who got into it without immediately feeling significantly better and gaining a deeper purpose in their life. Serving food to the homeless, reading to small children, supporting the chronically ill, donating to the victims - anything, it doesn't matter, the psychological effect is the same, as neither the place nor the frequency decides anything. Giving selflessly to the unknown expands your heart and you are rewarded in love and respect for yourself.

LEVELS OF GOODNESS

A famous English word for charity, charity, is derived from Latin caritas, which means much more. Caritas is Christian love (agape), as selfless as it is dispassionate. I emphasize this, because the basic message of Christianity is now no longer abstract and reads "Do good to your neighbor as much as to yourself", so it could become easier to put it into practice. As a moral principle, it is difficult for her to find her mother. If it were lucky that the entire Western world truly rested on it, everything would look significantly different today.

The next "level" of kindness is related to giving to another who takes something from us, in some cases - to sacrifice. I don't just offer a few hours or a small part of my earnings. At least once, at least because of someone, I will "take the shirt off my back", I will give up my only meal, I will give the last penny. Most often, the reason is special (treatment, relocation, poverty), and the person is known and close, as when one family member donates a kidney to another. There are, of course, heroes of kindness, who risk their lives for strangers in, for example, a bus sinking into a frozen lake, or, less dramatically, give up their entire inheritance in favor of a humanitarian organization.

Religious organizations are easy to criticize because they themselves are terribly far from the ideals they propagate. There are, however, more complex issues. One is the place where Ivan Aljoši explains that it is impossible to love one's neighbor, but only one's neighbor. Is human nature really so narrow that our kindness towards someone disappears the more we get to know each other and all attempts to enlighten ourselves give, at best, minimal results? Second, why do we so often think of goodness in a philosophical or theological key? It would be equally pessimistic if it turned out that a person must have a support outside of himself for goodness, that only a few are strong enough, or lofty, or pure, to be able to carry goodness within themselves without great external inspiration.

The next discouraging thought is that there seem to be fewer good people in the world, wherever the source of that goodness is, than there are strong, smart or successful people. When Dostoevsky, more than 150 years ago, tried to write a novel about a perfectly good man, he titled it "The Idiot". In today's world, kindness is even lower on the scale of social and personal priorities. We don't really have a (secular) institution that deals with the early development, encouragement or support of goodness. Schools teach by rote, and ethics classes are abstract to children; the media is full of aggression, pornography and nonsense; successful, say, sportsmen or politicians, are often narcissistic and greedy, and some are even evil; art rarely deals with kindness.

And this is not only bad, but potentially very dangerous. Each of us is alive only because someone was extremely good to him. But it's not just a matter of gratitude and reciprocation. We are all here not only because of others, but also for others; the core of human being is reciprocity, exchange and kindness; the world is already hard anyway, if our hearts are also hardened, it will become unbearable. Without constant mutual exchange of kindness, there can be nothing either in the outside world or in us.

Kindness, of course, must be illustrated by one's own example. It is easy to preach or analyze it, it should be practiced daily, so that we encourage ourselves and others to new good deeds. Because people easily faint and fall into hopelessness, lose enthusiasm and faith in the fact that goodness is possible, that it can win and that it will win in the end.

But there is more. Kindness has always been, and perhaps especially today, a value that we must not only illustrate, but also defend. Baseness, arrogance, violence, superficiality, greed... there is an endless series of obstacles and discouragements for those who try to be good. Even worse, there are factors that not only hinder but also directly and actively fight against goodness. The fight against them, starting with speaking about them clearly and loudly, is not a matter of choice but a moral obligation, and it can turn out to be the best of all good deeds. The only important choice is the methodology, since in the fight for good we must not use the weapons and strategies of evil.

Somewhere in the Talmud there is a parable that perhaps best illustrates the priceless importance of kindness. In short, she says that one extremely bad and one extremely good man lived in two neighboring houses. When God had enough, he decided to punish the evil one - and kill the good one. Think about it!

The author is a psychologist