Let’s start with a thinking process and, consequently, a behaviour strategy, which we’ll refer to conventionally as “kindness”. We may have many effective strategies based on envy, hatred, anxiety, aggression, and variously configured and reproduced affects – these are all very familiar. Not only that, but we very much even intensely struggle with all this in ourselves (neurotic), in others (narcissist), destroy others, or even shyly support those who do destroy, making them in their projections all-powerful, ideological, vectorial and many other things (psychotic).
“Goodness man” is someone with a tremendous unconscious desire to give but an equally enormous need to receive something real, tangible, as tangible as possible back. The problem begins when there is no “give” in return. That is when “this symptomatic destructive goodness shows itself”. Do you want to check whether the good is symptomatic, or is it ‘the good as law and order of its realization in the life of the man?’ Do not give any thanks back, instead. What you meet is what it is.
However, our task is not to study the good as a law of being but to understand the trajectory of the symptom, which we now realize is not the good but something else.
“… A mother tells her son for a long time – how much she wishes him good and how much she has invested of her own life in him, and in return, she asks (I think we all think of the same thing) – total submission to her lack – to belong to her wholeheartedly and for the rest of her life. The real goodness of a mother!”
So, let’s start with what is visible – behaviour. As we understand it, we are talking about irrational actions with a lot of activity but no action. “…. You say I don’t want to eat, but the answer is you must eat it. Otherwise, you don’t like your mother. You say it’s tearing me up from the inside, and life is getting out of control. And in reply, you get: “Eat some soup. Otherwise, you don’t love your mother”.
So it turns out that a person with a symptom of goodness grew up under the influence of the all-absorbing, breathless kindness of those closest to him. He is so “fertilized” that he mechanically, at the level of reflex, reproduces the same.
Let us go further, or rather, closer to the “I”. What is the position of “I” of our do-gooder? Of course, it is nothing, this position. Weakness in reproducing one’s inner (somewhere far away, hidden) needs and desires. Consequently, permanently scarce resources and, by the “principle of enhancing the forbidden” of what’s scary – wishing to be kind and help everyone, without exception.
…aha, remember…? “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”…
That would be all right, but the weakness of this “I” is that it, indiscriminately helping everyone and doing good, falls prey to manipulation, the price of which is sometimes life. So you become an accomplice to violence without realizing it.
The price of cowardice for the self is its total, painful splitting. And one lives in one – doing good and at the same time-serving the cruel manipulations of the one who does it to him, a real S&M…active-passive.
But what’s in there with the subject? How is it? Where does it unfold, and what forms does it take? It is a question we cannot answer.
The “do-gooders” don’t reveal themselves. They are paranoid about observing everyone, feeling they are the Almighty… But this is only a hypothesis. One thing is clear, the symptom of the good is where man has failed to cope with the power of the good (all-consuming, blind), has not subordinated it to his ‘I’, and has failed to use it as a resource for reproduction. And by destroying others with total “goodness”, he became its prisoner.
One thing is essential, be afraid of the “do-gooder”, lest, having fallen into your scarcity, you become a subsequent “do-gooder”…
<< Back to the list of articles
