J is for Just

Just as in Justice.

According to Merriam-Webster:   "having a basis in or conforming to fact or reason :  reasonable <a just but not a generous decision> b archaic :  faithful to an original; c :  conforming to a standard of correctness :  proper a (1) :  acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good :  righteous <a just war> (2) :  being what is merited :  deserved <a just punishment> 

b :  legally correct :  lawful <just title to an estate>"

Synonyms are fair and rightful
The opposite of Just is unjust and unfair.

Fairness seems to be key in justice. But fairness itself is often misunderstood.



Fairness has a basis for comparison. As does justice.
For example. Some people confuse sameness with fairness. They say, for things to be fair, things have to be same all around. But anyone with enough sense knows this is nonsense.

For example:
My friend has a peanut allergy. I don't like peanut butter much, especially with chocolate. The combination is not one I like at all. But I have family and friends who love Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. So whenever the bags of candy get passed around, is it fair that everyone must have Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, without regard to situation or choice? I know plenty of people who get offended every time I turn them down because the stuff grosses me out. And what about my friend with the allergy. It could kill her. Fair does not mean everyone gets the same thing.

Another example, a more obvious one:

You are at a barbecue. Hamburgers and pork hotdogs are being served along with your favorite beer. Your pal has offered to make bacon burgers, which you think is really, really cool and has made you excited. However, you have invited a vegan family, a Jewish family, and a Mormon family to participate and told them not to bring anything. If fair means everyone gets the same thing, who at this party will be happy?  Just you and your friend.

Third example.

A mother, an infant, a teen, and a father are having dinner. The mother is not very hungry. The infant does not have many teeth, and the teen is ravenous, and the father is tired and hungry. What will be served for dinner? The same thing at the same portions? Or different things depending on need, desire, and ability?

Fair means everyone gets what they need. It is not about wants, or about demands. It is about not burdening someone with something unnecessary.

So how does this relate to the virtue of being Just?

When you are just, you deliver to others not only what they need, but what they agreed upon. Being just is more about being correct than generous. It is more about following the rules.
Justice and being just requires a set of agreed upon rules, whether they are rules to a game, terms of a contract, or the laws of the land. A standard.

So it can be fair to give other people different things according to needs and private convictions. It is just to allow people to act according to their conscience, as long as it does not violate the terms of the rules you have agreed to live by. So when people complain about things being unfair or unjust, they need to establish the standard first. Because not everyone needs the same thing. And for that matter, not everyone deserves the same thing. Like with contracts, there are also agreed upon actions. A fair and just employer pays the employee for proper work done. A fair and just employer can also fire an employee who does not do the work according to contract. A fair and just employer also pays hard working employees a wage according to real needs, rather than being greedy about money.

How is being Just a Godly trait?

This one is obvious. Good people who strive towards goodness will receive just reward in the end. As will those who pursue evil will reap the results of their choices. This is justice.

J is for Just.

I is for Intelligent

I think Intelligence is actually a very misunderstood virtue. Intelligence is not the same thing as smart.
Let me explain.

The word smart has the nuance of witty, intelligent, and maybe even a little bit snarky. It is like being called a smarty-pants.  People say: "Don't be smart with me!" But are never heard saying "Don't be intelligent with me!"

Intelligence, according to Wikipedia includes "one's capacity for logic, abstract thought, understanding, self-awareness, communication, learning, emotional knowledge, memory, planning, creativity and problem solving. It can also be more generally described as the ability to perceive and/or retain knowledge or information and apply it to itself or other instances of knowledge or information creating referable understanding models of any size, density, or complexity, due to any conscious or subconscious imposed will or instruction to do so."

Often people talk about computers becoming intelligent...but that kind of freaks me out. I mean, how many movies have been made where the computer was 'intelligent' yet attacked just about everyone in the film?

Uh...

2001: A Space Odyssey
I, Robot
Terminator
Eagle Eye
The Matrix
Battlestar Galactica
Blade Runner

To name a few...

Intelligence is not just problem solving, which is what most people mean when they talk about intelligent computers. It isn't even just logic or recognizing patterns. I had this scanner, for example, that had 'intelligent' programming allowing it to recognize patterns in images it scanned. It looked for words, faces, and what could be landscape. The problem with it was that it tended to crop things I wanted scanned whole. If I was scanning in a photograph or artwork with a lot of negative space - something crucial to the art - the computer would just crop around the face. I had to go to drastic measures (such as writing in the far margins around the picture) to make it stop. The fact is, I don't trust any machine to think because they don't really have judgment, which is crucial to real intelligence (That was a key point in I, Robot, by the way). In other words:

"To Err is Human.

To really screw things up takes a computer."

But I digress.

Real intelligence is something of an effort. Seeking knowledge. Studying things out. Thinking. And yes, using Logic. But also recognizing patterns where logic may have no understanding. And best, accepting correction by those who know better. This is intelligence.

The opposite of intelligence is Ignorance. It isn't just a lack of knowledge. It is sitting about doing nothing but remaining the same in knowledge. Repeating what has been repeated without testing if it is true. Accepting whatever without study. It is inert brain function.

According to Wikipedia, ignorance "is often used as an insult to describe individuals who deliberately ignore or disregard important information or facts."

I believe intelligence is acquired by degrees. Some people are born with more logical brains, capable of high knowledge gathering, whereas others struggle with adding things up in the same way but have another kind of intelligence when it comes to patterns, or people. That is to say, a person can be intelligent in one matter, yet ignorant in another. Take a computer programmer and a farmer. A computer programmer may know C ++ and the like, but he would have no clue how to cultivate permaculture. And the reverse is also true. A farmer embroiled in plants and life cycles may struggle with getting his email. Then again, a computer programmer could learn permaculture  (there's a great website for it), and a farmer could take classes in computers and programming. No one is stuck when practicing the virtue of intelligence.

How is this a Godly trait?

I realize the debate about Intelligent Design and Evolution rages on in the world. But if you believe in God, then it only logically concludes that He'd have to be one really smart dude to have done what He has done. After all, what does it take to create a world? A sun? A solar system?

I is for Intelligence

H is for Humility

Humility, first off, is not the same as humiliation. Humiliation is making someone feel low, dirty, and wretched. Humility is nothing like that. Humility is about treating others well. And the opposite of humility, in the Biblical sense, is Pride. That's right, Pride with a capital P.
According to Wikipedia, humility "is variously seen as the act or posture of lowering oneself in relation to others, or conversely, having a clear perspective and respect for one's place in context. In a religious context this can mean a recognition of self in relation to a deity or deities, acceptance of one's defects, and submission to divine grace or as a member of an organized, hierarchical religion. Absent a religious context humility can still take on a moral and/or ethical dimension."

I like that they give the two aspects and definitions because humility has several facets. For example, most people in power see humility as the first part "lowering oneself in relation to others". Yet in other social structures it is more about "having a clear perspective and respect for one's place in context."  But what if you were a king or a CEO? How does having humility apply in this case? In context, you are the top of the heap. And yet for both to have this virtue some other element must exist.

According to a Christian website, humility is "a quality of being courteously respectful of others". It gives no regard to station or position in life.

According to Merriam-Webster, humility is "the quality or state of not thinking you are better than other people."

So looking at the CEO and the king, the quality is not thinking he (or she in the case of a queen and lady CEO) is better than everyone else.

So, how does a king or CEO do this, since socially they are at the top of the heap? I think the best way is to recognize how much people need people. That a king is nothing without his subjects and a CEO is nothing without his employees. That if their subjects/employees are treated well they will have success in their kingdom/company.

When I was a kid my mother used to play this song on the piano a lot. It was called No Man is an Island. It goes like this:

No man is an island.

No man stands alone.

Each man's joy is joy to me.

Each man's grief is my own.

We need one another

So I will defend

Each man as my brother,

Each man as my friend.

Here's another version of it.

 

 

The opposite of humility is aggressiveness, arrogance, boastfulness, and vanity - or in the Biblical sense, Pride. It is saying "Me first" rather than, "We all matter". Pride is competition in its worst sense. It says "If you win, I lose." Rather than Win-Win, which is what Stephen R. Covey (the author of  Seven Habits of Highly Effective People) recommends to all great businessmen. Pride finds no joy in the success of others, but jealousy and envy. But in humility you are happy for all, realizing that it takes all people to make the world a better place.

 

How to foster humility in oneself can be tricky, though. First off, never assume you are "too-good" for some kind of task that others are required to do. Never assume that a lawyer is better than a trash man. One may be paid more, but without the trash man, garbage would heap homes and streets.

 

The world we live in is all about status and money - which is unfortunate because what matters most are neither things, but people. In the US especially we devalue certain vital jobs and lift up high profile ones. For example: a teacher who helps and guides each generation so that lives grow and flourish are paid far less than entertainers and athletes who do nothing more than make our free time pleasant while our butts are rooted into chairs. Both provide a service of a sort, but it is obvious who is regarded more by how much they are paid.

 

Humility is a God-like quality for many reasons. But especially in Christianity, the humble behavior of Jesus Christ who went about doing good and submitted himself to public lies, abuse, and execution is perhaps the best example. He went among people the Pharisees and Sadducees (the elite of his society in his day) sneered at and reviled. And his apostles after him continued his legacy, preaching also to the Gentiles (those that were previously regarded as not worth associating with).

 

H is for Humility.

 

 

G is for Generous

Generosity has often been seen as a virtue because, well, we love receiving those things that generous people give. It is actually quite a selfish response. But generosity is not just about things. 
According to Wikipedia it is a habit of giving without expecting anything in return. But I think that is an inaccurate definition.

According to Merriam-Webster, generosity is "the quality of being kind, understanding, and not selfish : the quality of being generous; especially : willingness to give money and other valuable things to others."

This, I believe, is a more accurate definition.

The opposite of generosity is stinginess, or being miserly. Greed itself is considered an opposite. Taking rather than giving.

The best example of this is Ebenezer Scrooge.



When people think of generosity they tend to think of philanthropy, but it really is about the attitude we have towards other people. Do we love them or do we hate them?

Looking at the Merriam-Webster definition again, it lists being kind and understanding. It isn't about tossing out lots of money or things, but about understanding others and helping those in need.

This is another virtue that has been researched.
So I'm going to list their studies here.

New Republic: Science of Generosity. Why Giving Makes You Happy.
Forbes: 7 Ways That Generosity Can Lead to Success
University of Notre Dame: What is Generosity?

And here is another site that promotes Generous Giving.

Generosity and Altruism are synonyms. But the fact that we have a separate word indicates a nuance in difference. Mostly it focuses on what we should not be. Not Miserly. Not greedy. And most definitely liking people.

I think also Christmas tends to bring out the best tales of generosity.
So I'll share 2 of my favorite film endings.


Best end for a miser, you think?

And this one is about a man with a generous personality, though not rich. Who definitely lived his life and loves people.

And it breeds generosity in others.

How is this a Godly trait? God gave us everything. What can be more generous than that?

F is for Forgiving

There are times when I really wish more people were Amish. They have the best reputation for forgiveness than any other group alive today that I know.
There is an old saying "To err is human. To forgive Divine."

Yet there are a great number of people who are confused as to what forgiveness entails. The old saying "Forgive and forget" to some stipulates continuing to remain within the company of those that my have harmed you. But I think that is a falsehood. For example, though you may forgive someone for hitting you with their car, you do not remain in the road to get hit again.

The opposite of forgiveness is grudge-holding. Grudge-holding leads to seeking revenge, which is not only harmful to others but dangerous to yourself and your own future. Even just holding a grudge causes severe problems.

To be honest, I think this is an incredibly difficult virtue to live but the most rewarding. There is a saying within my church. "Heaven is filled with 2 kinds of people. Those who are forgiven and those who forgive."

The Mayo Clinic did a study on the health benefits of forgiveness once. One of the major benefits is the reduction of stress. But more is that the inability to let go of grudges impedes emotional progress.

Here are a few more study links on the same topic:

John Hopkins
Harvard Medical School
Berkley
Oprah
PBS
Psychology Today
Stanford

Do an internet search for more.

The point is, forgiving is important. Not just for our health, but also for the progress of society and life.

The best example for forgiveness is in the life of Jesus Christ. Whatever people may think or believe about him, he was a man who was abused, dealt with slander, and even when he was being tortured and executed he still asked God to forgive those who were hurting him.

Think about it.

To forgive is Divine.

The Politics in Science

I'm taking a short break from the Alphabet of Virtues to make a brief comment on something I have been reading recently.

First off, I am a fan of North and South American Anthropology and Archaeology. I have been since I was a child. I've also been a student of folklore of many cultures, especially that of the natives of the Americas. I've been reading a great deal about the early archaeologists of North America, specifically about the excavation and cataloguing of the Adena and Hopewell cultures. They were Mound Builders (as this is what has not bio-degraded and all we have left of them) who occupied the Midwest and Eastern portions of the United States long before the Europeans came to the Americas. Their empire rose and fell, and there is enormous evidence that they had trade with the Mississippian cultures and with the Aztecs of Mexico. That's a lot of territory. Larger than Rome ever got.

I used to wonder why we didn't study these cultures more in school, as we make such a big deal about Egypt, Greece, and Rome. But the older I have gotten, the more I realize that we really do get a European-centric education. I mean, I've lived in Mainland China, heard their point of view on history, and have realized that much of what is taught in school about that place is usually limited to 2 paragraphs in a text book.

But back to anthropology.



While reading about the archaeological exploits of Lewis Henry Morgan and his counterparts, I learned many of them were motivated by the politics of the day - mainly land rights. His theories led to a belief of cultural evolution - which sets human beings in 3 stages of society (hopefully considered outdated today): Savagery, Barbarism, and Civilization. The main underlying reason for this logically follows that if he could prove the Native Americans to be savages then he could justify taking their lands and forcing them into 'civilization' of his own culture. It would justify putting the Indians on reservations, taking their children from their parents and indoctrinating them with European philosophies, and also to rob them of their culture. It also gave him justification to marginalize all the North American antiquities - especially the mound sites - and close the land from further exploration.

This just got me mad. Cultural evolution is nothing more than 'scientific' RACISM. It is using science to justify the maltreatment of others. Hitler used it in the Holocaust. And I think it is despicable to brush this piece of history under the rug.

It may also be the underlying reason racism is still alive today. When any one group assumes superiority to another and uses it to deploy violence... Well, I'm sure the Evening News is enough evidence that this happens.

E is for Earnest

Earnest. According to Google, Earnest means "resulting from or showing sincere and intense conviction".
According to Merriam-Webster Earnest means "serious and intent mental state".

So being Earnest means being sincere and serious.
So the antonym is being insincere and not serious.

Now I have this great Uncle named Earnest. We call him Uncle Ernie. And whenever I heard this word I tend to think of the satirical play "The Importance of Being Earnest."



I know, a silly example. But why is it Oscar Wilde chose that name?

So in looking to the meaning of earnest and why it is a virtue... Let's look at the antonym, which is insincerity and lack of seriousness. That is to say, someone who is not earnest does not mean what he/she says, and does whatever with an attitude of "Whatever."

That's not exactly a trustworthy person. Not a person that can be counted on. Someone who is Earnest is someone who understands that there are things important enough to focus.

Pascal said "Earnestness is enthusiasm tempered by reason."

Charles Dickens said, "There is no substitute for thoroughgoing, ardent, and sincere earnestness."

It has been attributed to why people become great, and why others do not.
Here's a site full of quotes about Earnestness.

Whatever you do, be earnest about it, because half-hearted effort rarely if every cuts it.

D is for Determination

This one will be short.
Determination as opposed to laziness in this case is a virtue.

It was Winston Churchill who said, "Never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never give up."

Calvin Coolidge described it with persistence:

"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not: nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not: the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent"

Basically the greatest of artists, intellectuals, and geniuses are nothing without determination.

 

So, laziness being the antithesis of determination... it is a bit like a baby refusing to grow up. To be honest, I think we all know that one physically adult person who does nothing but wishes to remain living like a child.

 

Films like "Failure to Launch" epitomize this deplorable mindset.

 

Honestly, how many people really dream of going nowhere with their lives?

There is a supposed Chinese saying I heard once.
"He who sits with mouth open and waits for duck to fly in will have long hunger."

Determination is the drive that leads us in progress.

C is for Civility

Civility the root word to civilization, is also the groundwork for a civilization to thrive. It's opposite is rudeness.
Civility is formal politeness and respect, according to Google. Merriam-Webster says it is "polite, reasonable, respectful behavior."

Civility is pretty rare these days. Most of the rising generation are mimicking TV and thinking up zingers rather than thinking of ways to be polite to others. People Troll on Facebook and YouTube just to click on dislike rather than just to let things alone. And they do worse. Basically bullying has become the new sport for a very many people.



Humor today is mostly crass. It includes farting humor, body humor, sex humor, and snarky comebacks. Respect seems to be deemed as old-fashioned. Making-fun rather than having-fun has become the norm.

However, I often wonder if civility is not the real difference between a barbarian and a civilized person.

Think about it.

A polite person asks kindly with 'please' and 'thank you'.

A thug demands with 'gimmie' and 'or else'.

I know, I sound a little extreme, but think about it. When was the last time you watched a comedy that was funny that did not have some kind of zinger or crude joke? And if you had, from what era was it? Was the humor ironic or sarcastic?

I think this is why I like watching old movies. These were intelligent comedies where you had to think to get the joke. Society was expected to rise up rather than the comedy lowering down.

I once saw the move "The Women" in the old black and white. Then I saw the remake. It is amazing to see the differences in behavior of these women. You can tell the heroine by who is civil and who is not. An example.



I had hoped to find the scene where the little girl proves to be more of a lady than the her new stepmother who had broken her parents' marriage. Unfortunately it wasn't available.

I think many people are noticing the depressing drop in civility in our society today. More people are calling for an increase in kindness. I'm posting their links below.

"The Civility Wars" The New Yorker
His site.
"The Meaning of Civility" from the University of Colorado
A civility forecast.
Civility Matters
Civility, Outrage
The Civility Campaign
The Civility Institute

Google it for more.

Civility is a virtue because treating others with respect is the first step towards true equality. Raising people up, not putting people down is what makes a society rise up. Lifting, not condemning. Supporting and helping, not crushing and defeating. The fact is, if you are zinging everyone, eventually no one will trust you not to zig them. You become dangerous as a conversationalist... among other things.

There is a saying I like:

"Kindness Begins with Me."

As for incivility.

Stop it.

B is for Benevolence

Benevolence - according to Wikipedia, it is good will or disposition to do good.
But Merriam-Webster's online dictionary says it is more than just a disposition. It is also an act of kindness or a generous gift.
The opposite of Benevolence is Malevolence. Malevolence is having ill will towards others, wishing others harm, injurious in general.

Whenever I look at these words, they don't just imply a way of thinking, but also a way of action and character.

That said, being benevolent is not just being good, but behaving in a manner that produces good.

So, for examples: Mother Theresa and Al Capone. 2 born Catholics. One benevolent. One malevolent.

Mother Theresa: Acted for the good of many, saving and inspiring lives.

Al Capone: Killed a lot of people for money and power.

This is why I never blame a religion for the actions of individual members. Both chose to either follow the tenants of their faith or to reject it. It is the tenants of the faith that I look at. If the tenants of a faith teach murder and hate, then I worry.

I think the key element of this virtue here is: what kind of legacy are you leaving behind?

Why is this a God-like trait? Lots of people love to blame the ills of the world on God. But they keep forgetting that everything they have comes from God. Food, air...life in general. The issue again is whether or not we comprehend the goodness (and I'd say extreme patience) God has.

Leaving a good legacy. This to me is Benevolence.

Alphabet of Virtues: A is for Altruism

Ok, the beginning of the Alphabet of Virtues.

According to Google, Altruism is "the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others."

But I think it is basically doing things that benefit others without expecting anything in return. It's opposite is selfishness.

Why is altruism a virtue?

In our modern age, society thinks giving without getting something in return is nuts. In fact, we tend to teach a "What's in it for me?" philosophy on a daily basis in TV and movies. Relationships are taught to be 50-50 rather than 100%-100%, which is the more healthy relationship.

Pro "What's in it for me?" Philosophy

I found this quote while looking for examples. Political novelist Ayn Rand said this:


(To be honest, I wonder what kind of civilization she is describing here. I've never read her books. But I do know Libertarians love them. Maybe I should start, just to get a point of reference. I'll report back later on my progress and my feelings about it.)

But just from this quote I have several objections.

First of all, to reject morality of any kind or sort is dangerous.

Second, it is a really cold philosophy. Especially for relationships.
I mean, good parents have to be altruistic. They must understand that they will probably never get anything in return. Love is not real love if waiting for some kind of product return. Parents who raise their children only so their children will take care of them in the future will probably end up being shocked or disappointed when old.
And as for a loving relationship between spouses, if you are only doing something to get something, your spouse will more likely feel used rather than loved.
And Friendships? You are only friends with someone you can get things from? Really?
But Ayn Rand was thinking about business. The problem with that is quoted in Charles Dickens' book, "A Christmas Carol" said by Jacob Marley: "Mankind was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The deals of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!”

Think of all the people you have admired. Did you admire then because they wanted something from you and did all they could to get a certain result from you, or did you admire them for what they gave regardless of expectation?




Three people I admire have the trait of altruism:
Mother Theresa
Martin Luther King Jr.


Mother Theresa

George Washington

Mother Theresa was not a pop star. She was a nun. She wasn't gorgeous. She wasn't uber rich. She was poor. And she gave all her time to the benefit of others, especially the orphaned children of India. She did not do it with the expectation that these kids would one day set her up in a cushy retirement. She had no expectation of return at all. She did it because she believed it was right.

Martin Luther King Jr. (Picture above) was an activist, who yes, did have something to benefit if he succeeded. But the likelihood of him succeeding within his lifetime was an upward fight that he knew would more likely benefit the generations after him. His famous "I Have a Dream" speech was not about him becoming famous or beloved or rich. It wasn't about creating a following to set himself up as an icon. It was about freeing others from oppression. And in the later years he focused a great deal on helping the poor, something he wasn't at all.

George

 George Washington intrigues me the most. The man was born well-off. He had no children of his own, but raised the children of his wife (who had been a widow), and then their grandchildren. In the Revolutionary War, he led his troops against a superior enemy and did not give up. And when elected President of the United States of America (the only president to get 100% of the electoral college votes) he insisted on being called "Mr. President" rather than "Your Highness" which is what others wanted to call him. He refused to take on the large salary they offered him at first. He was also reluctant to take on a second term as president, and refused to serve a third. How many of our presidents today can say that? He disliked the formation of political parties, interference in other countries, and slavery. And though he had inherited slaves from his father, in his will he ordered them free. In fact, he even provided pension for the older ones and training for the young former slaves so they could have useful skills. To be honest, I think he is why I really like the name George.

Altruism doesn't usually draw attention. Most altruistic people are not famous and never will be. They usually do things without fanfare or media attention. And most altruism isn't in the huge acts, but the small and simple things. I think this is why the title Mother is so endearing to children. Moms are perhaps the most sacrificing without expectation of compensation. And why the word Nanny though fond, has some taint. It is why teachers like those in films such as Freedom Writers, are so beloved. She took on extra jobs to buy her students books that her school would not. I doubt she made a profit or became rich.



I don't feel as courageous as she was. But I'd like to be.

A is for Altruism.

Why Altruism is a godly trait.

God gave us EVERYTHING we have. People say God asks a lot from us, but God does not ask us to worship him because He needs it. He asks us to worship Him because WE need it. The act of worship is the act of betterment of our lives in becoming more godly.

Jesus Christ did not suffer and die then resurrect to show off how cool and powerful He is. He suffered for us so we could become clean as He is clean. He died and resurrected so we could also be resurrected. He gets nothing from us.

A is for Altruism.