Have you ever considered just what we mean when we say, "He seems like a pretty nice guy?" Does it mean he has good manners, is kind, friendly, amicable, and easy to get along with? Most likely. Does it also mean he is slow to anger and quick to laugh? Also likely.
Allow me to add another aspect to the mix of those whom we consider to be "nice." There is a subtle behavioral difference among people, I find, and it involves a choice in how to interpret the actions of other people. Here is what I mean.
You are in traffic, in a rush to get somewhere, and suddenly a slow driver pulls out in front of you with no apparent care in the world. Operating entirely on a difference clock speed than you, the person forces you to sit through red lights you'd otherwise have made, and no matter how you try, you just simply can't get around him or her. How do you react? Do you fly into a rage and begin reciting the relative demerits of their ancestors? Do you take it in stride and just go along with the flow, realizing there's not much you can do to change their pace? Or do you react somewhere in between? "They're doing that on purpose!" you might conclude. "They pulled right out in front of me just to spite me!" you think. Perhaps your reaction depends upon the circumstances of your day, your mood, and the position of the moon relative to your mother-in-law. That is all understandable. But allow me to finally get to my point, which is this: when confronted with frustrating behavior (to you, at least) on the part of another person, do you generally
1) give them the benefit of the doubt, or
2) assign a motive to their behavior?
Your answer to this question, I believe, has a lot to do with whether or not people consider you to be "nice," or otherwise.
"That jerk did that on purpose!" you might say or think. "He did this, which means that, and he knew darn well that . . . ." or "He should have done this if he wanted me to . . . " or "I know what he really meant by that," and the list of examples goes on.
Some of the "nicest" people I know, who have therefore become great friends of mine, are people that seem to usually choose response number 1). They are slow to assign illicit motive to the behavior of others, they demonstrate a level of patience with other people's actions, and they are slow to pass judgment. Others, with whom I have sometimes temporarily been in association, seem to predominately choose response 2), in which they automatically assign motives and reasons to the behavior of others. Rarely, if ever, are these motives positive. It is as if they think they have an incredibly acute clairvoyance, which allows them to both clearly understand the reasons for another person's behavior (when that person may not even understand his behavior much himself!) and to draw conclusions from that behavior which reflect wider consequences. "He's doing that because blah blah blah, and that can only mean he thinks blah blah blah."
Our society is actually quite genteel. It is difficult to get away with behavior that is too rude or openly obnoxious. Therefore, many people have learned to shield these "motive assigning" thoughts a little bit. They appear kind and gentle on the outside, but inside they are world-class motive assigners. This leads to passive aggressive behavior, pouting, moping, broken lines of communication, the carrying of grudges, and a whole host of other childish behaviors. Sadly, in the end, they mostly hurt themselves. Their lives are a long, sorry tale of broken relationships and fractured friendships. As the saying goes, bitterness is a poison pill one ingests while hoping to hurt the other person.
The benefit-of-the-doubters, on the other hand, are disarming. The more you hang around them the more comfortable you feel. You become less and less self-conscious, less afraid of being authentic, and less fearful of making mistakes. You begin to realize that even if you do mess up, you will likely be given the benefit-of-the-doubt and everything will be okay anyway. As a matter of fact, when you dig deep enough into the thought process of a benefit-of-the-doubter, you realize that they assign motives, too. It's just that they tend to assign positive ones to you instead of negative ones! Talk about "nice!" Who wouldn't want to hang around someone who was quick to think the best of us as a knee-jerk reaction to any of our actions?
As you consider these two types of people, I imagine you've already had names pop into your head of those who fit each of the categories. I know, it's hard not to do. But classifying people that way is almost as bad as assigning impure motives to their behavior! So stop it (and I will try to stop, as well!). Instead, take the constructive side of this message and analyze your own behavior. Are you a motive-assigner or a benefit of the doubter? What would your five closest friends and/or family members have to say about you?
It's worth considering. And if you don't like the answer you get back about yourself, change!
If you don't? Well, it simply means that you are a lousy no-good loser that assigns motives to people because you've got an axe to grind with a chip on your shoulder about that one time you asked me . . . aw, never mind. I know why you did what you did, and I'm not speaking to you anymore.
