Trying to be a Good Person Does Pay Off

Being Good Vs. Trying to be Good

I do not claim to be a great person, or even a particularly good person. However, I have no hesitation in saying for the record that at least I try to be a good person. What exactly constitutes a "good person" is of course a matter that has been debated by philosophers, religious/spiritual, and the everyday man and woman on the street for time immemorial. While there are many, many points of disagreement there does seem to be at least some overlap. Moreover, there also seems to be an innate understanding within (most of) us of the difference between good and bad, right and wrong. For myself being a good person means being kind to others, helping those in need when I can, working to leave the world a better place than I found it, striving for fairness in all my dealings with others, being honest and trustworthy, and respecting differences of opinion, to name just a few. Now matter how you specifically define it, if you have a set of core values, and they align reasonably well with the core values of most other good people, and you make an honest effort to remain true to those values I believe you can make a valid claim to (at least trying) to be a good person. Of course that does not necessarily mean that you are a good person. First, "honest effort" and "trying" are very much open to interpretation and debate, and second, you might be wrong in your beliefs about what is good. In fact, although I believe it unlikely, it is possible that we are all wrong about what is good and what is bad. If by some cosmic happenstance you or all of us are indeed wrong, and your values are actually at odds with the good of the universe, you can still hold your head high. In that case, you cannot blame yourself, and should feel no shame. You made an honest effort and were proven wrong. That does not make you a bad person, only a misinformed one.

Motivations for Goodness

Some people (try to be) good because they expect some reward for it. They think it will allow them access to heaven when they die, or it will gain them the respect and admiration of their friends and loved ones, or it will earn them favors in the future, etc. Others are good because they fear the consequences of being bad. They might worry about going to hell when they die, or of going to jail here on earth, or letting down their friends and loved ones. For most people it is probably a mix of those two reasons. There are however a small subset of people that do not strive for goodness for either of those two reasons. These people try to be good for no reason other than for the sake of goodness itself. They just think being good is the right thing to do, the right way to be. They do not know any other way to be. For them the existence or not of heaven and/or hell is of no consequence. Nor would it matter if all laws on earth were suspended and all jails and courthouses permanently closed. It also would not matter if they had no friends or loved ones to impress or disappoint. They would strive to do the right thing in any case, because that is the only thing they know how to do, or at least, the only thing they want to do or will do.

The "Best" Motivation for Goodness

In my mind those who do good only for the sake of goodness itself are the most noble of all good people, the most deserving of our respect and admiration. And of course, of these type of people, there are a precious few. That said, it is a greatly debated point among ethical philosophers if the motivations for being good or doing good in any way correlate with the actual goodness of the person or act or thing. In other words is a good deed done for totally unselfish reasons "more good" then one done out of expectation of reward? For purposes of this story I am going to assume that the motivation for goodness is indeed important to the overall goodness of a thing. Assuming that is true I would rank the three categories of motivations for goodness I describe above in order from most to least good as below:

(Good for) sake of goodness --> expectation of reward (selfishness) --> fear of punishment (fear).

It is of course debatable whether fear is less good than selfishness as a motivation for being good. Neither one sounds all that great when you put it down in black and white as I just did. However, as I have written about previously in a post co-authored by good friend and writing colleague Samantha Drobac, fear along with suffering are possibly two of the worst motivators for anything. Whether or not the motivations for goodness in any way effect the level of "goodness" of a thing may be debatable however the motivations for goodness are critically important in terms of our everyday interactions with others and how they view us as people. Therefore, they are highly relevant in terms of our success and happiness in life. Of the three main categories of motivations for goodness I mentioned one stands out as the most impactful and effective in the long run and it is not the same as the one which I would consider based on my rankings above as the "most good". In fact, the "real world impact" rankings of motivations for goodness, are basically the opposite of the ethically/morally based rankings I proposed above.

(Good for) ---> expectation of reward (selfishness) ---> fear of punishment (fear) --> sake of goodness

For myself I would say I am primarily motivated to try and be good by my desire to win the admiration/respect of other good people I admire and respect. I have never been one to consider consequences (negative or positive) as seriously as I probably should, and I very much do not like to rely on fear as a motivator for any action, though of course it is impossible not to be motivated by fear in some circumstances. It helps if you think about this in terms of real world examples. If you focus on doing good things for other people you know or interact with regularly (basically out of the selfish belief that you will get somethin good in return whether it be good will or actual physical "good" things like money or awards or whatever) then you will over time build up a core of people who think highly of you, who like you, who would be predisposed to also do good things for you now or in the future. This could be very helpful to you in an unknown future in which you may need their help. In contrast, if instead you focus on doing good things for the sake of goodness, things like helping random strangers, or giving money to charities anonymously, while you may be a very good and noble person, you can expect no help from them (except in the rarest of circumstances) in the unknown future when help is needed.

Maybe what this is really showing is why being good for the sake of goodness itself is such a noble thing. It will earn you no favors, win you no friends, basically do almost nothing for yourself personally though it will do a ton of good for others. And that is the point really isn't it and also why it is so rare. People generally are not inclined to go out of there way to be good without some return on that investment. I am not arguing that you should not do this, for indeed you should, but what I am saying is that if you want to increase the probabilities that being a good person will pay off for you in an unknown future you should focus more on being good and doing good things for those you know and who are closest to you. It is a very sad conclusion actually, but unfortunately, it is also a very true one.