To think that people have the principles they can afford?

[Hullygully]

Do you have, or know anyone that does, principles that would absolutely not be ditched in the event of greater wealth?

When my environmentally conscious db started making money he found he could do more positive things for his principles as well as the sheer abstaining: he has spent a lot of money making his house environmentally sustainable through insulation, new heating system etc. But he hasn't suddenly felt the need to overindulge in other ways.

Very few principles are incompatible with having money, though as Agent pointed out some may be difficult to combine with being short of time.

Oh Hully you are now using words i don't understand

"Whatmeworry Thu 14-Jun-12 10:02:03
How can one tell - without giving them loads of unexpected wong?

Watch what people do, not what they say. Especially when under pressure."

Yes, I agree, actions speak louder than words, and there have been many times where I've caught myself doing things that I had previously said I would never do or vice versa. I like to think I hve revised my principles because of this. But who knows?

But don't your principlces change

a - as you get older/wiser
b - as your circumstances change (eg starting work, getting married, giving birth

I have checked and I don't have any principles - apart from animal welfare. I don't think I would buy battery chicken if I couldn't afford free range.

Agree with watching people under pressure to see the true person. It's like the people who turn out to be fantastically brave in a disaster, and those who run screaming. I have no idea which I would be....

mrsjay - what words? perpetuating? just means "keeping going"

Why is it seen to be morally superior to send your kids to a state school? I don't get how that is a moral decision.

Short sighted people wear 'private' spectacles rather than NHS ones, is this then 'immoral'?

You aren't perpetuating the system. Changing a system is lot more fundamental than people withdrawing the top ups they purchase to fill in the gaps.

Yes that word i am a bit thick

If you do win the euromillions Hully, remember young Abs over here.

I am currently reading a FASCINATING book called "thinking fast and slow" which is all about the influence of your subconscious/instinctual brain over your rational thought processes, and also things like hunger etc. Psychologists have found an effect called "ego depletion" - basically the more tired/stressed or low in glucose you are, the less self control you have. So if you are in a comfortable, happy position, you're more likely to be able to stick to your principles rather than if you're tired and hungry. You're also more likely to go for easier choices than having to engage your rational thought processes.

It is weak and shallow if they talk about those principles though Trill. If they just quietly get on with it then they can believe whatever is most comfortable for them, it doesn't matter.

But if they go on about how they would never use private school and make people feel judged or guilty for their own choices, then it is weak to not be confident enough with your own position that you don't need to put others down. Talking about it at all seems shallow to me, especially if you can't afford it anyway. It's a cheap and frankly pathetic way of trying to talk yourself up,when there is simply need to. Just get on with doing what you want without preaching about the morality of your choices.

See, MN, enlarge your thoughts AND your vocab! Gotta love it.

well i have learned a new word today now to fit it into a sentence watch out for it i may just plonk it somewhere random ,

Freddos - but doesn't that mean that one can't have discussions with people then?

Surely if you have millions and are principled about state schools, you could donate a couple to the local school for better facilities, teachers and general support.

On the other hand, if people with money can afford private schooling and healthcare, surely that puts less pressure on the state systems.

That's ego as in id/ego/superego is it Abs? Sounds interesting.

I agree with Freddos on that. You do get some people who bang on and on about how their choice is the only right choice and if you don't agree you're an idiot/evil etc.

It's not about not engaging or being able to have discussions, it's just the more you go on about something the more you set yourself up for a fall.

Outraged I'll agree that it's unpleasant to put other people's choices down or to try to make yourself out to be more principled than you really are, but my point is that people don't know that they are deceiving themselves. They really have convinced themselves that they have these principles. They aren't saying one thing and thinking another, or being deliberately hypocritical.

I can totally think of someone who not only gave up her principles but had a personality transplant when she married a rich guy.

When we met her she was a skint single mother, just enrolled at college and washed up in the evenings at a restaurant while her Mum babysat. She frequently had the phone cut off and borrowed a few quid when she was very short of money. Her friends babysat for free and I paid once to get the clutch on her car fixed.

She met Mr Millionaire and said these exact words to her college mates "You are all cup of tea friends now and I don't fit in with you anymore".

Meaning she will meet us for a cup of tea but she would not socialise with us.

Her DH sleeps with prostitutes and she turns a blind eye to it. Lovely couple.

Sorry, haven't time to read whole thread, but personally I would LOVE to be wealthier so that I could afford more principles!
E.g.
getting train much more often
shopping only in small high street shops
ethically sourced meat and veg
decking out house with solar panels and one of the ground source heat pump thingies
organic clothing
fair trade everything

All of which I realise make sound like the biggest lentil weaving dullard in the world, so I'll stop.

It is actually kind of like that, but the author (Daniel Kahneman) refers to System 1 (so I suppose your Id/instincts whatever) and System 2 (your rational thought processes). The basic premise is that we're much more influenced by System 1 than we'd like to think. The chapter I was reading this morning is about "anchoring" and experiments he and his former research partner did. Anchoring is basically that people will be influenced by numbers more than they realise. They did an experiment where they had a wheel with numbers 1 to 100 on it, but they rigged it so it would either stop at 10 or 65. They then had people come in, would spin the wheel and would then ask them what percentage of countries in the UN are African. People who had had 10 came up always went for a lower number, while those who had 65 always came up witha higher number, around the 65 mark. Another one (which freaked me out) was that if people are exposed to talk/images/words related to money, they will act in a more selfish manner.

You can have discussions without being sanctimonious about certain things though Hully. You can discuss thoughts that you have about certain ethical issues while still acknowledging that your circumstances may make it harder for you to uphold those principles if the need arose.

Like I can say I passionately believe in the state education and feel its unfair that some children have an advantage over others. That's true, I really do believe that. But I can also say that I fully understand people who don't use state education, and say that I would use it if it was a choice between that or a crap school. I still have a valid opinion on the subject, but without judging others for their choices.

I think some principles we hold when we're young (and/or poor) can be held out of ignorance and they don't change until our situation changes and we understand more about it.

So with me, I am thinking about how as a healthy teenager I would have very happily signed a DNR, because I believe humans aren't designed to live forever. Whereas as a person with small children I would now only want to sign a very impossible to judge and word selective DNR to allow me to be saved in some cases for my DC...

Other things I think you are more likely to change your mind about on the basis of what your peers are doing, especially in terms of our DC, where no parent wants there kids to feel excluded or left out.

I suppose I'm saying that after having children you are more likely to have changed your ideals in your heart of hearts.

X posted. Trills, I think doing that shows a weakness of character though. It doesn't make a bad person, but if you have to convince yourself that you have principles just to make yourself feel validated instead of because you genuinely believe in them, then that's weak.

But if you don't know you are, is it still weak?

Oh, I have one that goes along with that TeWe!

On principle, I don't like Comic Relief. I have many reasons for this which I wont go into because it's not the point, but my principle is firmly that I don't want to support that charity.

But then when red nose day comes along and I have a choice between sticking to my principle or allowing my child to be left out of something, I abandon my principle like a hot brick! I don't like it, but it's the lesser of two evils to me.

Maybe that makes me very weak! But I dont care when it comes to my child, it's not his responsibility to uphold my principles.