Is it fair to judge and criticize people in general?

[wasteofo2]

What be y'alls opinion on judging and criticizing people in general?

Lately, I've been feeling that it's increasingly unjust to criticize anyone about anything that isn't blatently harmful.

For instance, in school, I sit at near this kid who has horrible hygene. His hair is always matted with grease, he's got tons of dandruff, and obviously bathes very infrequently.

He's obviously aware of the fact that he doesn't bathe nearly as often as everyone else. For whatever reason, he doesn't shower often; he's obviously aware that most everyone else showers regularly, and that he has significantly inferior hygene to the rest of us. But for one reason, or many, he doesn't clean himself. I could criticize him for this, but where could I really find the justification? I may shower almost every morning, but that hardly makes me a perfect person. I'm mean to people, and I'm rather prejudiced in general about almost every sort of person I encounter. So does showering put me on some pedastal(sp?)? Hardly. Plus, he's a really nice person, in most estimates he's probabally a way better person than I am. So where would I get off criticizing this guy who has bad hygene when I'm a prejudiced bastard? I don't see where I could.

But by following that logic, then no one would get criticized. No one is perfect, and so long as you have your flaws, my logic goes, you dare not criticize mine.

Anyone have a more workable philosophy about the criticism of others?

 

[Dawguard]

But by following that logic, then no one would get criticized. No one is perfect, and so long as you have your flaws, my logic goes, you dare not criticize mine.
Anyone have a more workable philosophy about the criticism of others?

Everyone has their flaws, and using your logic no one could criticize anyone. This is utterly impractical, as well as destructive. Criticism does not have to be bad, it can be a tool. For instance, you point out to the guy next to you that he should take better care of himself. If he does then he presents a respectible appearence to those around him. Needless to say this would have a great many benefits, so your criticism helped him. By refraining from criticizing him you simply allow him to remain the same and never improve.

As for simply pointing out his faults for the sake of showing how bad he is, that is wrong. Everything depends on your intentions and method of delivary. If you say it kindly or helpfully, he probably won't be upset. If you sneer at him, or just mention how filthy he is, he'll rightfuly be mad at you.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

What be y'alls opinion on judging and criticizing people in general?
Lately, I've been feeling that it's increasingly unjust to criticize anyone about anything that isn't blatently harmful.
For instance, in school, I sit at near this kid who has horrible hygene. His hair is always matted with grease, he's got tons of dandruff, and obviously bathes very infrequently.
He's obviously aware of the fact that he doesn't bathe nearly as often as everyone else. For whatever reason, he doesn't shower often; he's obviously aware that most everyone else showers regularly, and that he has significantly inferior hygene to the rest of us. But for one reason, or many, he doesn't clean himself. I could criticize him for this, but where could I really find the justification? I may shower almost every morning, but that hardly makes me a perfect person. I'm mean to people, and I'm rather prejudiced in general about almost every sort of person I encounter. So does showering put me on some pedastal(sp?)? Hardly. Plus, he's a really nice person, in most estimates he's probabally a way better person than I am. So where would I get off criticizing this guy who has bad hygene when I'm a prejudiced bastard? I don't see where I could.
But by following that logic, then no one would get criticized. No one is perfect, and so long as you have your flaws, my logic goes, you dare not criticize mine.
Anyone have a more workable philosophy about the criticism of others?

Define "Blatently harmfull"; this term is only defined through ones opinion/society.

There are many things you have to define there. Most everything is opinion, and most everything should be taken like that.

Not many may like this, but personally (and again this is an opinion). I do not like open minded people, I do not like when people try to avoid taking one side on an issue, and try to see the other side. You shouldn't be looking for a safe stance an issue, which is what being open minded basically is. Understand and listen to the other-side? Sure, but looking for a safe stance...

If I decide to criticize someone then I will, and I don't mind if people criticize me. This dependence on people's view of themself in society is wrong. You shouldn't care what people think you are.

Anyway, really it depends on the moral definitions in the society of the issue in question. "Harmfull" (bad) can be considered anything, by any person or group, and same with the point of constructive criticizm (good). For instance, I may consider the bad smell from the kid in questions "harmfull", I can even consider his existence harmfull! I and bet you, in some places of the world this idea wouldn't be looked down upon by -that- societies moral.

 

[Dmstifik8ion]

You may not be aware of his circumstances. He may need assistence. Offer your personal assistence, friendship and understanding if you have any to offer otherwise live and let live.
If on the other hand his existence or behavior is a threat to your own existence and well-being than you have an obligation to yourself to make him aware of this and if he proves to be unnegotiable than seek legal options using the heirarchy of athority figures at your disposal.

In other words, don't make more out of this than it is. We all pay small prices to live in a free society. It is when freedom is in jeopardy that we must act!