How do liberals guage success?

@McGentrix,

You wrote,

Quote:

I dunno Soz. Even desolate landscapes have people that succeed. You would be hard pressed to find anyplace on earth where someone hasn't figured out how to succeed in something. Even without govt and roads and bridges...

There are many third world countries in this world where paved roads and bridges are non-existent. It's also a fact that those "places" have nothing that can be compared to the industrialized countries of this world where communication and transportation are available in abundance. Without infrastructure, eeking out a living is based on agriculture - if they can get the seed and water supply.

Nobody does it alone.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

That's an excellent point: without a banking system, most businesses would not exist. How many business transactions are done through credit cards?

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Success is to achieve goals you set. For success to be a degree, wherein not all success is created equal the differentiating factor is the degree of difficulty of the goal.

This doesn't mean I define success as an inherently good thing, of course. And as for how I decide on the relative "goodness" of any particular example of success you have to have a fundamental premise upon which your moral compass is based for this. Mine is the maximization of happiness and minimization of suffering.

So if your goals result in a net negative for mankind I would say they are bad goals, if they result in a net positive I would say they are good goals. And the greater the net gain the greater the good.

How does that translate into what I consider successful for myself in my personal life? Well as long as I am happy and leave the world with a net positive impact I'll be fine with it. I tend to set increasingly difficult goals for the happiness part (boredom is my suffering) but if I had to have a "purpose" in life it is to maximize my happiness while having as positive an impact on society as I can (my right to the pursuit of happiness ends where the right of others to peacefully coexist begins). And as long as I am happy and not harming it passes muster in my eyes.

I'd probably measure personal success in similar terms, with the degree of success represented by how difficult the achieved goals are and the relative goodness of the success measured by the net impact to happiness.

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Ya gotta thumbs up from me! Mr. Green

There's a balance between the good and bad results for society; greed does funny things to even once good people. Some people gain riches through pain for others.

Some people don't have a conscience or care for society at large.

As for setting and achieving goals, they must be realistic ones. With the change in our economic environment, studying hard to get a good education no longer promises a job after graduation.

A few people have the foresight to go into a profession that helps society with the knowledge that it's not going to bring them wealth.

Some people think that Romney has earned respect for his wealth, but I see that as his road to losing his soul. He doesn't know the difference between humility and humanity. His lies are legend.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

That seems very mathematical. I like the answer though, thanks for the input.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McG, I may have missed this, but how do you gauge success?

1 Reply

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

McG, I may have missed this, but how do you gauge success?

It's all about the Benjamin's...

That's a joke. Take a breath now, let your pulse get back down to normal... breath in, breath out...

As Conan once said "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you and to hear the lamentations of their women."

Ha! Got you again!

Success means different things to different people. Personal success starts with setting goals and achieving those goals is a form of success. It's the base of my definition that gets rounded out from there. Everyone has different goals, therefore success can have many different outcomes. For some, the goal might be find true love. For others the goal might be make a million bucks. For others still it may be wake up in the morning.

Societal success is a more difficult thing. One person's goals may interfere or collide with another's goals. You know, good guy bad guy stuff and all that. I think that there is an overall view of success that can be achieved, like the names I mentioned earlier. They have all been successful in achieving their over-arching personal goals and those goals sometimes become societal goals and when achieved become signs of success or failure.
Lets use poor Drew Bledsoe for example. I had high aspirations for him achieving his goals, but his success ended up being a failure while Brady was able to achieve his goals using mostly the same resources.

So, success? Achieve your goals.

(I am not copying Robert!)

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Thanks for the answer. The follow-up question to this is: is success something to be celebrated, then, if the goals one succeeds in aren't beneficial to society or anyone other than themselves?

I'm quite sure you see where I'm going with this.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Thanks for the answer. The follow-up question to this is: is success something to be celebrated, then, if the goals one succeeds in aren't beneficial to society or anyone other than themselves?

I'm quite sure you see where I'm going with this.

Cycloptichorn

That would depend on the goal and the individual celebrating. Osama had a goal to attack the US. He was successful. Many celebrated, many did not. Us had a goal to Kill Osama. Goal achieved, many celebrated, many did not.

Both goals were successful though and both celebrated. Just not by the same people.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Are there any "moral" considerations involved?

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

By a gauge meter that measures the blood pressure of the republicans. The more enraged a republican becomes, thus the higher blood pressure, the more the liberals consider themselves successful.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Are there any "moral" considerations involved?

For a Conservative?? Surely you jest, c.i. Laughing

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Are there any "moral" considerations involved?

For a Conservative?? Surely you jest, c.i.

Whats this then? A joke?

Whose morals do you want to use? Mine? Yours? Osama's?

3 Replies

@McGentrix,

How about Romney, the perpetual lying machine?

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Are there any "moral" considerations involved?

For a Conservative?? Surely you jest, c.i.

Whats this then? A joke?

Whose morals do you want to use? Mine? Yours? Osama's?

You didn't answer my questions earlier about whether or not you consider Romney's method of garnering a fortune to be morally correct, or something worth celebrating. A simple yes or no would do.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Are there any "moral" considerations involved?

For a Conservative?? Surely you jest, c.i.

Whats this then? A joke?

Whose morals do you want to use? Mine? Yours? Osama's?

It never occurred to me that morality is such a subjective matter, open to individual interpretation. Then you're saying that whatever I consider moral -- e.g. honesty, compassion, integrity etc. -- are not necessarily moral qualities for you? Even if we accept that quite a number of concepts of so-called 'morality' are subject to cultural norms within different societies, I think that any of us raised in the Western culture would agree on certain basic principles of morality. Don't you agree with that?

*p.s. To answer your first question -- of course this is a joke. This whole thread is.

2 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Some facts on Reaganomics.

Quote:

In addition, the public debt rose from 26.1% GDP in 1980 to 41.0% GDP by 1988. In dollar terms, the public debt rose from $712 billion in 1980 to $2,052 billion in 1988, a three-fold increase.

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

I would certainly say that we share some morals and differ on others.

For example, do you believe I am moral in my desire for unfettered access to any and all firearms I wish to possess? Judging from some of your other posts, I would assume not. But, why should I allow your moral values to impede my desires for what I want?

What about the devout Muslim living in the hills of Pakistan that believes in honor killings and death to all infidels? Do you share his morals?

If you have never considered morality to be a subjective matter, perhaps I would not be out of place for you to consider it now.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Here's a good comment I read on this topic:

Quote:
I'd rather stick to what Gilchrist said.“My father’s hands didn’t build this company? My hands didn’t build this company? My son’s hands aren’t building this company? …Through hard work and a little bit of luck, we built this business. Why are you demonizing us for it?” What about his workers? Their hands did nothing? I'm sure Gilchrist is getting a line of credit for operating expenses. So there's the banks hands helping. The gist of what Obama said is "No one makes it in this world alone." It's the truth. If that hurts your pride then maybe it's your conscience fighting for it's life.

Cycloptichorn

I must have missed this...

Quote:

What about his workers? Their hands did nothing?

Their hands were probably being held out waiting for a paycheck.

Quote:

So there's the banks hands helping.

Yeah, and I am sure they would have been all "let me help you" when he missed some repayments on those loans, rights?

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

You're claiming that someone isn't assisting or helping with an endeavor, if they are asking for recompense for their work? I have a hard time believing that you really believe this.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

How do liberals guage success?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know