Mark Twain infamously remarked, "Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company."
The main protagonists in films and novels are often lawless individuals, vengeful vigilantes, and other antiheroes of dubious moral character, who are regarded positively as strong-willed and decisive, whereas good people are often put in secondary roles and portrayed negatively as weak, spineless, and indecisive individuals, with namby-pamby personalities. Is this because filmmakers and novelists know their market? Do readers and moviegoers find antiheroes more exciting?
Dear Karl Pfeifer and readers,
Thank you for your interesting question. All I can offer for now are some personal reflections. It seems to me that the economic success of movies and literature featuring antiheroes would confirm that we like the fiction of antiheroes. On the other hand, in real life, reckless and dangerous people are in – in my opinion – not so much interesting then more of a nuisance - in the best case that is.
Furthermore, most academics I have ever met fall on overage in the category of boring people (well behaved, polite, considered, following the rules and so on). Yet, some of them present ideas and arguments that fascinate me.
Hope that helps to perhaps start a discussion.
Best,
Sven Beecken
I suppose we should start by defining what makes a person good and how do we know it?
Presumably, we view people we "good" if they do the things we prefer or would have them do with the intentions of improving something.
We might say Mohamed Ali was "good" at boxing, but we would not necessarily say he was a good person.
In this sense we might imagine a "good" person was anyone inherently good, that is, they are nice or they follow social customs and that they have a generally positive outlook and will try to help people.
They have a concern for social norms and other people.
Whereas people who are "bad" act more selfishly or negatively - and since they are not always interested in upholding social norms, we are less sure of what they might do.
I would say that good people are only boring in the sense that they are predictable. They can be counted upon to follow social customs and not to do anything out of the ordinary because they are not interested in being disruptive.
But the line of discussion that should emerge from this question is WHO IS A GOOD PERSON AND HOW DO WE KNOW IT?
Good people are not boring, possibly their lives go by without so many shocks. In the world of entertainment, more attention is given to conflicts, bad actions. Let's not forget how much our children's stories end. "... and that's all folks or and they all lived happily ever after..." Apparently living happily offers little to tell. When I think it would be a good excuse to tell interesting things.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy