When did you last do a good deed?

[SinSin]

Im a goody goody lol The last time I did a good deed was yesterday, Simply an old dear was in my shop (bookies) at 8pm and I offered to walk her to her taxi as she had been mugged on a previous occaision    just doin my bit for the old folk that made the country what it was when there was'nt stupid kids attacking people for simply walking down the street.

[Stupot]

But I think Nikolas is on to a good thing, and Stupot's attitude confirms it.

I'm not sure whether you meant my attitude was a good one or a bad one.  The Eddie Stobbart comment was a bit extreme.  I hope I didn't make it sound as if I only do good deeds because I revel in the praise and the thanks.  I helped the guy with the pushchair because I didn't like to see him struggling.  I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a token gesture of appreciation when you do good by someone.

Imagine how the guy designing Nikolas' CD cover would feel if Nikolas didn't thank him.  He's not doing it for the money, and he's probably not doing it for the thanks either.  But he'd still expect Nikolas to show some kind of gratitude.

As for good deeds done to me.  My friend gave me his car.  When I came back from Japan I had £10 to my name, and no job.  He's recent;y gone off to uni, where he knew he wouldn't be needing to drive.  And knowing I was in no position to buy a car he gave me his.  I owe the guy so many favours.

[Andail]

As I see it (when it comes to benevolence), there are four kinds of people.
The Cynist
This person simply won't make any efforts to help other people, unless the link to their own well-being is very straight and direct.
The Pragmatic Socialite
This type loves to "be there" for other people in their sphere of friends and family. It's the kind of person who always calls up friends in need, simply because they enjoy - or are addicted to - the feeling of being involved in whatever happens. Also dependent on gossip and intricate affairs amongst people. They often trespass on people's privacy in this pursuit.
The Ego-Feeder
Doesn't require social confirmation or official praise. This type loves the feeling of doing good, and can survive for days purely on their own self satisfaction. Can get depressed if too long time has passed without a conscience boost.
The Theist Reward Hunter
These people believe they'll come to heaven if they've done enough good deeds. Always strive to improve their karma, so they'll end up on the plus side on judgement day.

[Babar]

I don't think I fit in there.

(You were expecting that, no? )

I'm a 'mood strikes me' && 'there is an occasion for it' do-gooder.

Like I see someone who needs a lift, and I'm not in a huge hurry to anywhere, I'd pick them up. There is even this one guy who is always on my way, so I've made a sort of unofficial arrangement to be his driver to where he needs to go everyday.

Another example being recently when a large group of my friends got Pizza to eat, we over-ordered, and there was about (combined) 1 and a half  pizzas left over. Everyone was stuffed, so it was easy to convince them that they didn't need to take the left-overs home. I gave it out to some of the beggars who are usually roaming the market.

Are those considered good deeds? Not so sure anymore.

[PixelPerfect]

@Andail

I think generalizations are bad, for everybody. They narrow your image of the world by making up rules and guidelines which aren't there. The more dangerous thing is that people usually start to believe in them because they are easy to manage in your head. People are complex and so are their motivation for actions.

[Stupot]

I wouldn't say I fall into any of those categories, Andail.
If I was inclined to classify myself on the 'Benevolence Scale' I would classify myself as someone who 'does as he would like done unto himself' - How could I ever expect anyone to help me out when I need a hand if I never go out of my own way to help people once in a while?  And equally, If someone does help me out I always show that I am thankful, which is probably why I get annoyed if I help someone and they don't thank me.

[Edit]
Me, me, me... (I cringed when I read that post back).

[Andail]

Hehe, those categories are meant to be taken rather light-hearted. Hence the quite rpg-esque titles and stuff.

[auriond]

I'm not sure whether you meant my attitude was a good one or a bad one.

Oh, I'm sorry if it came out sounding like I was implying you had a bad attitude! I didn't mean it that way. I simply thought that your post confirmed my point that people like to be thanked.

Actually, I thought Andail's categories are pretty spot-on, if a little on the cynical side. By that I mean that there are other categories which he left out (such as, perhaps, the Perennial Do-Gooder who might have once started out as a Theist Reward Hunter, but who internalised the good deeds so much that it becomes a part of him). And of course there are always people who don't fit into any of the categories. I would personally class myself as what Andail calls the Pragmatic Socialite, though my circle of friends is far too small for me to think of myself as a socialite of any kind. And I don't think I trespass on anyone's privacy... but then what do I know?

[Tuomas]

Hehe, those categories are meant to be taken rather light-hearted. Hence the quite rpg-esque titles and stuff.

You fail

Anyway, none of us falls in any category anywhere. BUT, through those categories we can be defined. You could be half this and half that. Like, if you're half in the elf category and half in the human category, then you are a half-elf!

[Pumaman]

The other day I was walking along and some guy was trying to come out of a shop with a child in a pushchair, by using the pushchair to open the door.  I opened it for him.  Not so that I could congratulate myself, and not because I see myself as a saint, but because the guy was struggling.  And if it had been me in his situation I would have been grateful for someone to come a lend me a hand.  But this guy just walks straight past me without so much as a semi-appreciative nod.

Perhaps you've hit the nail on the head here.

The reason that we do a good deed isn't necessarily selfish and just doing it makes us feel good; but having done it, if the beneficiary doesn't so much as acknowledge us for helping them then we can feel pretty annoyed by it.
So we don't do the deed to get thanked, but having done it, we feel that some acknowledgement is only fair. After all, thanks is free to give so maybe it's just downright rude for them not to say "cheers".

[Stupot]

It might just be because we are all brought up to mind our Ps and Qs.  I was always told to say thank you, and that it was rude not to.  If I expected the pushchair guy to thank me it was because I have been conditioned by my upbringing and the society I live in.

I've been thinking about this and I've come up with a little theory:

Giving and taking is not just something humans do.  In the animal world there are many examples.  But I think humans made a giant leap toward becoming a civilised species when they learned how to trade.   Perhaps an early man gave his fellow Neanderthal a lump of meat in return for some water.  This would have prevented a nasty scrap between the pair and improved relations.  It would have also been a matter of survival.  The people will have learned that to gain something they would need to give something in return if they wanted to avoid a fight.

Since those days the notion of trade has never left us, and I believe it is in our very genes.  It is so inherent in our nature that we feel we feel the need to repay favours, however small, even if it is with the simple words 'thank you'.

This is what we call gratitude.  But when the roles are reversed and we are the 'giver' we experience an opposite of gratitude - a kind of expectation for some kind of acknowledgment of our deed.  If and when the 'taker' says 'thank you', the 'gratitudinal balance' is restored and we feel better.  However if the 'taker' doesn't say 'thanks' the balance is not restored and that feeling of expectation turns into disappointment or even anger... Hence the Eddie Stobbart remark.

I'm pretty pleased with that.  It came to me as I was writing.

[tube]

But I think humans made a giant leap toward becoming a civilised species when they learned how to trade.

We're not the only species to have learned how to trade. Other social animals mainly trade various gifts and "social services" for sex and/or protection, but the principle is the same.

[bicilotti]

But I think humans made a giant leap toward becoming a civilised species when they learned how to trade.

We're not the only species to have learned how to trade. Other social animals mainly trade various gifts and "social services" for sex and/or protection, but the principle is the same.

[ot]Trade is something like an 'innate' value in a human being, as hunting antelopes is for a Lion. Intelligence, opposable thumbs and so on would be quite useless without that.[/ot]