Who is the fairest of them all? Research reveals we hold a rose-tinted view of our own morality

[bigheadfred]

Recent research published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science has shown that when evaluating their own morality, people will almost always judge themselves as morally superior to the average person.

This better-than-average phenomenon reflects peoples' overly positive evaluation of themselves - a "positive illusion" - which may have consequences for decision making and conflict.

If everyone is special, no one is

The researchers from Royal Holloway, University of London's Department of Psychology asked participants to judge a series of human qualities as to how desirable those traits were, how much they themselves possessed those traits, and how much they thought the average person possessed the traits. These qualities included descriptors such as hard-working, sociable, honest, trustworthy and prejudiced.

Nearly all participants rated themselves highly on the moral traits, but rated the average person as distinctly less so. This discrepancy between the true average (what everyone rated themselves as) and the perceived average, (what everyone rated the average person as), led the researchers to conclude that, "nearly all participants irrationally inflated their moral qualities".

Previous research in the field has argued that such 'positive illusions' promote individual wellbeing. However, this study revealed that even those individuals with relatively low self-esteem identified themselves as morally superior to the average person.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiKitCS1sbQAhXDMGMKHQ8jDQsQFggfMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedicalxpress.com%2Fnews%2F2016-11-fairest-reveals-rose-tinted-view-morality.html&usg=AFQjCNHO9zw7u4gG3MiJoNzIGpmtNutEIQ&sig2=KsXsO-tnf-U0Nvs3j-sB1g

[Free Vulcan]

And this right here, will be the downfall of our country.

[JustPassinThru]

I don't see how it could be otherwise.  If I thought someone were more moral than i was...I'd emulate him.

If I didn't think so, I'd keep on being as I was and am.

It's like taste in clothes.  Unless a person is dressing for someone else - spouse, office dress-code, military uniform - barring those, we dress the best we know how, by our own tastes.  WE think we're dressing the best.  OTHER people make fashion blunders; not us.

Because if we thought they were blunders, we'd stop.

(while I put on my plaid pants, to go with my striped shirt...)

[Oceander]

I don't see how it could be otherwise.  If I thought someone were more moral than i was...I'd emulate him.

If I didn't think so, I'd keep on being as I was and am.

It's like taste in clothes.  Unless a person is dressing for someone else - spouse, office dress-code, military uniform - barring those, we dress the best we know how, by our own tastes.  WE think we're dressing the best.  OTHER people make fashion blunders; not us.

Because if we thought they were blunders, we'd stop.

(while I put on my plaid pants, to go with my striped shirt...)

Very good point!  Don't forget the cardigan with the diamond pattern to go over that striped shirt!

[bigheadfred]

Very good point!  Don't forget the cardigan with the diamond pattern to go over that striped shirt!

@JustPassinThru

I never have to worry about fashion fails. My wife dresses me.

[Smokin Joe]

I don't see how it could be otherwise.  If I thought someone were more moral than i was...I'd emulate him.

If I didn't think so, I'd keep on being as I was and am.

It's like taste in clothes.  Unless a person is dressing for someone else - spouse, office dress-code, military uniform - barring those, we dress the best we know how, by our own tastes.  WE think we're dressing the best.  OTHER people make fashion blunders; not us.

Because if we thought they were blunders, we'd stop.

(while I put on my plaid pants, to go with my striped shirt...)

As for morality, I agree. I recognize those on par, morally, although I have a tendency to give people more credit than they deserve sometimes, and I have met some I consider to be morally superior in that their ways of dealing with the immoral are somewhat unfettered by social conventions or more constrained than my own. Either has its moments, and I have on occasion admired the way people have dealt with situations I might not have dealt with quite the same way. 


As for clothing, not me. I don't much worry about fashion. I'm a fan of comfortable, durable clothes. Practical garments with a decent lifespan, and something you could get by with if stranded in the sticks. Blue jeans, boots, wool socks, and heavy twill shirts are standard with me. If I wear slacks and a 'dress shirt', I feel like I'm wearing pajamas. I wore a necktie for my last two years of High School, and I haven't had much use for one since. To me, they are just something to keep the soup and gravy off your buttons, an evolutionary branch of the bib, and something that has far too much potential to get tangled up in some piece of equipment and cause harm.

Now, I don't consider that 'superior' to anyone else, and have little doubt others won't see the NFPA 2112 tags on the Flame Resistant clothing and recognize it usually costs more than the dress shirt or the slacks they have on, but I don't really care. The bottom line is that I am comfortable, and for me, the clothing is practical, too.

[bigheadfred]

While I don't wear fire retardant clothes, I dress much the same. And when I go to work I dress for work. I do general maintenance there as well as my regular tasks. And I don't mind getting glue, etc. on my clothes. They are WORK clothes. I work with people who don't like to get glue on their fingers. Or their clothes dirty. I bluntly tell them to get another line of work. Most days I am covered in sawdust. I have stain, glue, grease, whatever on me and my clothes. Other people act like they are going to cry if they look like that.

[bigheadfred]

@Smokin Joe

I can see why you would want flame retardant clothes in your line of work.

[Smokin Joe]

@Smokin Joe

I can see why you would want flame retardant clothes in your line of work.

I got by for decades without them (just don't set anything, including yourself, on fire, and you'll be OK).

It was an OSHA requirement that was handed down a few years ago. All it did for most of us was mean a $20 pair of jeans now cost $70, a shirt went from $20 to $70+, and a pair of (uninsulated) coveralls went to the 120 dollar range. I have a set of severe weather (Nomex III, insulated) Parka and Bibs that cost nearly $1000 I call my 'gumby suit', because I can hardly move in them, but they are good down to -40.

In all fairness, there have been a few people saved from what could have been more severe burns by them.

Most of us were wearing cotton to begin with (less chance of static sparks, doesn't melt if you do get it to burn), and I always liked clothes which could take a bit of wear and tear. Since they are special work clothes, I get to write them off, but gone are the days when guys went down to thrift stores and bought clothing to wear on the rig, where drilling mud would ruin it anyway.
 

[Smokin Joe]

Morality is a standard of right and wrong.  In the world of Judeo-Christian ethics, the standard is set by God, not man.  The fact that we all fall short in one way or another does not make the standard wrong.  Hypocrisy is something that should make us all redirect our own behavior to fit the standard.  It is not something to use in order to eliminate all standards.

For example, if Charles Manson condemns mass murder he is a hypocrite and he is right.  We do not lower the standard because many have fallen short of it.   The hypocrisy of the speaker condemns the speaker, but it does not alter the standard.

I agree. God didn't take a poll when He set the bar. He laid down the law, and left it to people to follow it as best they could.

[bigheadfred]

@Smokin Joe

I shop at the thrift stores for clothes since I don't have any standards to stop me.

[Smokin Joe]

@Smokin Joe

I shop at the thrift stores for clothes since I don't have any standards to stop me.

I stop in from time to time to see if they have a decent suit in my size. I haven't found one yet, and it's been a couple of years since the fire. I never saw the urgent need to replace them, but sooner or later, I will need one.

[Silver Pines]

I seriously, definitely don't think I'm any kind of moral example.  I'm a Christian but I screw up a lot, and I know the potential for improvement is vast.

[roamer_1]

Not me. I know I'm a dog. If it weren't for the love of YHWH and the teachings of Yeshua, I wouldn't even know how to stay on the porch. Therein lies my only claim.

[bigheadfred]

I seriously, definitely don't think I'm any kind of moral example.  I'm a Christian but I screw up a lot, and I know the potential for improvement is vast.

You know what Catherine. I have more respect and feelings of good for people who can look me in the eye and tell me that than a vast portion of the people I have ever known.

[Silver Pines]

You know what Catherine. I have more respect and feelings of good for people who can look me in the eye and tell me that than a vast portion of the people I have ever known.

@bigheadfred

Thank you, my friend.  But it's just the truth, you know? 

[bigheadfred]

@bigheadfred

Thank you, my friend.  But it's just the truth, you know?

It is the truth that sets you up to  that higher level of a moral example you think you are not.

[Suppressed]

Since they are special work clothes, I get to write them off...

They let you do that even though they could be worn for personal use?  We got dinged by the IRS for work clothing that could theoretically be worn off the job (even though it had the logo).

[Smokin Joe]

They let you do that even though they could be worn for personal use?  We got dinged by the IRS for work clothing that could theoretically be worn off the job (even though it had the logo).

They did not contest it that I know of. The government required the use of outerwear that came up to NFPA 2112 Flame Resistance code (OSHA). It is an expense most of us who had limited time in areas where there was any likelihood of being on fire would probably not have undertaken otherwise, but became a requirement for being on location, period.

If you want, you can walk around in whatever you wear to work, but you aren't going to any white tie affairs dressed that way, unless that's what you wear to work.

Bottom line: before the rule, most didn't have it. After the rule, we all HAD to, as a condition of continued employment.