No.21450
The flaw of kindness as a moral principal is that it's voluntary and not rooted in a sense of shared obligations or really sharing in anything. You give out of kindness expecting nothing in return, but there is no obligation to be kind. We can analyze impulses to be kind as either externally or internally motivated. An external motivation could be force, fear of punishment or something less darker like wanting to build a reciprocal relationship. An example of an internal motivation would be Mencius' famous parable of the baby falling into the well. Mencius says that any stranger would be emotionally distressed at seeing a baby about to fall into a well and at least want to stop it. This underlines the Confucian principal of innate human goodness. In today's society, there is no real external or internal demand to intervene. So where does our modern kindness draw its moral force? Nowhere? Society's desire to make everything voluntary, even feeling emotions for others, has only increased social cruelty and the number of forgotten outcasts left to rot.
Maybe genuine kindness isn't possible without care? Like a mother caring for her child, the relationship is two way and built on reciprocity, constantly giving and receiving affection, attention, happy moments. We can't all be mothers and treat everyone else as our children, but we can form bonds based on giving and receiving affection and caring for each other. But how can you care for others on an imageboard? Technology makes it truly hard to relate to others. Maybe its impossible and online relationships will never be like real ones. We have to go outside. But as more and more things become mediated by big tech platforms, maybe there won't be much of an outside left?
No.21451
My opinions on this are very political. Wanting to keep it cozy, I'll tread lightly. I think it's precisely that we are so deeply moralistic, but that our morals are often so flawed on fundamental levels, that has caused the problem first and foremost. That is the root of the problem. Communications technology is a catalyst, something that hastens this development, as it dehumanizes others by creating less-real feeling modes of communication. That is, communications technologies do play a role, but they are not the only or principal cause of the issue. The worst catalyst at play is a rather contentious issue, so it's perhaps not discussed here.
No.21466
The concepts we live by don’t enrich our lives or give us sustenance. In a liberal market economy, we are expected to be responsible individuals and take care of ourselves. Therefore, any act of generosity towards another is purely voluntary and there is no compulsion to do it. Since there is no compulsion, few people bother doing it.
>>21455When you do a kind deed you can see it register with the other person. You can see them smile, the warmth on their face, their thanks. The screen eliminates this exchange. It places us in a huge sushi rollymous crowd where we have even less incentive to be kind to others. This allows our crueler side to grow unchecked and because hey it’s just pixels on a screen and you can just turn it off. It’s the same reason dating apps have increased hook ups and porn consumption by making sex inconsequential.
