When I was a child and walking outside with my mother a bird pooped on me. I was disconsolate but she reassured me that this was something that brought good luck. Later on I learned that this was indeed a long held belief in Germany where she grew up. I suspect that its origin comes from another clever mother who decided this superstition was useful in stopping the tears of a inconsolable toddler. One can see the just world fallacy as having a similar origin. Teaching kids morality on its own can be hard. However, linking good behaviour to future benefit (or eventual salvation) can make that easier. And it is not much of a stretch from that point to viewing those with less or people who are different as deserving their inferior or more onerous lot in life
This is a very interesting article, and thanks to the author for having written it. I have to wonder if one of the reasons religion (or religions with an afterlife, or some kind of karma) exist is to resolve this problem, that eventually most people come to realize that life is NOT actually fair, and that bad things DO happen to good people, and the reverse. With a second (or more) chance(s) at life, there is the possibility that someone will get the happiness and good outcomes that they may have been denied on the first go around.
I was also pleased to see no reference to Donald Trump, given the author's predilections in this area, and given that the subject matter appears ripe for an association with DT (a supposedly bad person getting a undeserved good life).
It is also interesting to me that the author appears to feels very deeply, as evidenced by the editorial comment about how our society in the past found emotional cruelty entertaining – and that this was a moral wrong. Fair enough. Many people feel that way, especially today.
When I was a child and walking outside with my mother a bird pooped on me. I was disconsolate but she reassured me that this was something that brought good luck. Later on I learned that this was indeed a long held belief in Germany where she grew up. I suspect that its origin comes from another clever mother who decided this superstition was useful in stopping the tears of a inconsolable toddler. One can see the just world fallacy as having a similar origin. Teaching kids morality on its own can be hard. However, linking good behaviour to future benefit (or eventual salvation) can make that easier. And it is not much of a stretch from that point to viewing those with less or people who are different as deserving their inferior or more onerous lot in life
This is why neurotics make good policy analysts. A leading cause of depression is knowing how the world actually works.
My way to handle this - don’t expect the world to be fair but enjoy the rare moments when it is.
Ah gee thanks. Just what I needed to start off my day … sigh
This is a very interesting article, and thanks to the author for having written it. I have to wonder if one of the reasons religion (or religions with an afterlife, or some kind of karma) exist is to resolve this problem, that eventually most people come to realize that life is NOT actually fair, and that bad things DO happen to good people, and the reverse. With a second (or more) chance(s) at life, there is the possibility that someone will get the happiness and good outcomes that they may have been denied on the first go around.
I was also pleased to see no reference to Donald Trump, given the author's predilections in this area, and given that the subject matter appears ripe for an association with DT (a supposedly bad person getting a undeserved good life).
It is also interesting to me that the author appears to feels very deeply, as evidenced by the editorial comment about how our society in the past found emotional cruelty entertaining – and that this was a moral wrong. Fair enough. Many people feel that way, especially today.
I look forward to the next interesting article.