doing the right thing is not always easy essay

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Life Integrity

The Importance of Doing the Right Thing

Table of contents, building character and personal growth, fostering healthy relationships, promoting societal harmony and progress, leaving a lasting legacy, references:.

• Aristotle. (2000). Nicomachean Ethics (T. Irwin, Trans.). Hackett Publishing.
• Kant, I. (2017). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
• Kohlberg, L. (1971). From Is to Ought: How to Commit the Naturalistic Fallacy and Get Away with It in the Study of Moral Development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1971(5), 51-57.
• MacIntyre, A. C. (2013). After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Solomon, R. C. (1993). The Passions: Emotions and the Meaning of Life. Hackett Publishing.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Reading Books
• Student Loan Debt
• Valentines Day
• Neighborhood

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

An American soldier with British war orphans adopted by his unit; London, early 1943. Photo by Robert Capa, International Centre for Photography/Magnum

The right right thing to do

The ethical life means being good to ourselves, to others, and to the world. but how do you choose if these demands compete.

by Irene McMullin   + BIO

Conventional wisdom depicts moral struggle as an internal conflict between a higher moral self and an untamed dark side. This picture pervades popular imagination: the angel and the devil on either shoulder, the ‘two wolf’ parable, the Ego and the Id, the ‘true self’ and the ‘false self’. It resonates with religious traditions that place us between angels and animals in a Great Chain of Being, leaving us torn between higher and lower, spirit and body, good and evil, the demands of conscience and the lure of sin.

This view also calls to mind a philosophical tradition from Plato to Immanuel Kant that often presents life’s major moral struggles as a kind of combat between the requirements of duty and the dangers of desire. The self is fragmented and must struggle for wholeness by casting out or silencing its evil components, refusing to give immoral intentions a foothold in thought and deed. A good deal of moral theory, therefore, tends to assume that there’s a morally right answer about what one ought to do in any given circumstance. Any difficulty in doing the right thing results from (evil, selfish) resistance, not from the fact that one cannot do all the good or valuable things that one is called upon to do.

However, this familiar view ignores the fact that, in many cases, the problem is not how best to override or silence one’s dark side, but how to cope with having too many good or morally neutral demands on your limited time, energy or resources. In other words, the key issue in many cases is not whether to be moral at all – but rather how best to distribute your moral resources in conditions of scarcity and conflict. Coping well with this latter kind of moral challenge requires very different ways of thinking about moral agency and how to lead good lives.

There are (at least) three different classes of goods that regularly give rise to incommensurable but competing legitimate moral claims, each revealed through a different practical stance that we adopt towards the world as we try to figure out what to do and who to be. On this picture, each agent is indeed fragmented, but this fragmentation is not best understood as an internal conflict between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ selves. Instead, moral conflict should be understood in terms of competing dimensions of the good – not all of which can be accommodated in any given moment.

What are these three basic normative domains or classes of value? It can be helpful to think of these in terms of the traditional literary distinction between the first-, second- and third-person perspectives. A novel written from the first-person perspective provides access to the protagonist’s struggles from the inside; the reader says ‘I’ along with her. In the second-person perspective, the focus is on the other person: the ‘you’ takes centre stage. When written from the third-person perspective, every character’s struggles are viewed from the outside; each is referred to as ‘he’, ‘she’, ‘they’ or ‘it’ in descriptions of their movements in the world of the novel. Though some characters might be more important than others, typically none is singled out as providing the primary lens through which the world finds its meaning.

These perspectives are not just useful literary devices. They are core practical perspectives that we adopt toward the world and our place in it. As we pursue our projects and pleasures, interact with others, and share public institutions and meanings, we are constantly shifting back and forth among these three practical perspectives, each bringing different elements of a situation to salience and highlighting different features of the world and our place in it as good or bad.

F rom the first-person stance, you navigate the world as an agent trying to realise your projects and satisfy your desires. From the second-person perspective, you understand yourself and the world through the lens of other people, who are a locus of projects and preferences of their own; projects and preferences that make legitimate demands on your time and attention. From the third-person stance, you understand yourself as one among many, called to fit yourself into the shared standards and rules governing a world made up of a multitude of creatures like you.

These different perspectives reveal different features of the same object or situation. Take the example of your own body. When weeding the garden or washing the dishes you are – despite the physical nature of the work – largely ‘unaware’ of your body except insofar as it is the vehicle of your will. Indeed, what’s valuable and salient about the body from this first-person perspective is precisely its ability to disappear into the task. If you’re hampered by a migraine or an arthritic shoulder, the body’s status as vehicle of your agency is compromised, and you’re forced to think of it instead as a kind of recalcitrant object that needs to be managed. If it’s a perfect manifestation of your will, it’s no longer ‘your body’; it is, rather, simply you .

From the second-person perspective, your body appears as an object of experience for the other person. Think of how differently you experience your own body when you’re alone, as opposed to when someone suddenly enters the room. From the second-person perspective, one’s own body might seem awkward, desirable, average, ineffectual and so forth, depending on who the other person is. Now imagine that same body of yours being examined by a doctor. Then your body shows up for you as something quite different from a seamless expression of agency or the manifestation of self before another individual. Your attention shifts to a third-person perspective such that your body is revealed as a physical object subjected to the rules and categories of other physical objects. Different features become important. During a medical examination, you experience your own body as an instance of a general physical type, capable of being helped or hindered by generic procedures and processes developed for managing objects of that kind.

You must answer for who you are – if not to others, then to yourself

This kind of third-person practical perspective moves to the background when another perspective is setting the terms for what counts as particularly relevant or meaningful in a given situation. The point is to see how these different perspectives give us access to different forms of meaning, value and reasons – though we never occupy one stance in total isolation from the others. While occupying one perspective, we don’t simply forget the others, but are aware of and answerable to the claims that they make in an implicit way. Each perspective is constantly providing important information about what matters and what’s best, and we’re answerable to all three at once, even when only one is setting the agenda for how best to allocate our limited time, care and attention in a given situation.

The fact that there’s a plurality of these normative perspectives means that there’s more than one way of understanding what’s best. Best for whom? For me? For you? For the many who share the world with us and the institutions that enable this sharing? No single perspective can fully encompass the others. Each shows us a different facet of the world’s irreducibly complex meaningfulness and our place in it. Each gives us access to different ways of understanding what’s important, valuable or good. Our condition of normative pluralism means that we’re supplied with different resources for answering the basic questions of agency: what should I do? What are the better or worse options in this situation? Who am I trying to be? To whom am I answerable? This moral complexity makes living a good life challenging because competing goods from these different normative categories can’t be compared on a single metric. In most cases, there is no simple answer about what to do. To negotiate life’s demands, we constantly move in and out of each perspective against a background sense that we’re answerable to the different criteria of meaning and value constitutive of each of the three perspectives.

This emphasis on ‘answerability’ is a core feature of existentialist accounts of personhood. We experience ourselves as being ‘at stake’ in our choices, aware of the fact that who we are is up to us, and that we care about getting it right. Though we regularly try to cover up and forget this fact by means of bad faith, mindless conformity and self-deception, to be human is to be haunted by the anxiety that comes with an awareness of our freedom and the existential responsibility it entails. Ultimately, you must answer for who you are – if not to others, then to yourself. Our basic status as normatively responsive beings – that is, as beings with a capacity to be oriented towards distinctions of better and worse – depends on this sense of being responsible for who you are.

The awareness of being entrusted with an existence for which you alone are answerable means that we’re always on the lookout for guidance in how to make choices well. The three different normative domains revealed via the first-, second- and third-person perspectives provide tools for answering the fundamental existential questions that underwrite every choice. Each offers a different basic value framework through which the world makes demands on us about what it’s best to do. We are indeed fragmented selves, but what divides us is not, for the most part, a battle between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ intentions. Rather, it’s a tension between different practical frameworks for assessing better and worse options, each anchored in a different aspect of the good.

According to this existentialist picture, you can’t be entirely unmoved by whatever strikes you as better or best in any situation. Why? Because to be utterly indifferent to the considerations that count in favour of choosing one way rather than another is to forfeit one’s agency – to adopt the posture of a thing determined solely by causal forces, rather than that of an agent responsive to reasons. But even this forfeit is a manifestation of agency, albeit one that seeks to conceal this fact from itself. Though it’s not always clear how best to respond to specific normative claims as they arise across different practical perspectives in particular situations – and one might be incompetent or cowardly in facing up to them – we can’t escape the sheer fact that we’re answerable to such claims. We cannot help but care about the difference between better and worse lives, and that means we cannot help but care about responding well to the claims of each of the three practical perspectives.

I n contrast, a good deal of moral theory prioritises one of these practical perspectives and downplays the moral relevance of the others by ruling them out as providing genuine access to moral reasons. This has the effect of allowing any responsiveness to other classes of normative claims to be categorised as irrational or evil. For example, classical utilitarianism enjoins us to think of everyone – ourselves included – as an equal unit in the moral calculus that aims to maximise the satisfaction of legitimate desires and preferences. This is a third-person way of approaching the question of what it’s best to do, since each of us is to be treated as an equal moral unit, subjected to the same categories and assessments as any other. Similarly, Kantian deontology prioritises the third-person universality of a reason understood to be identically present in all agents. In each case, the good life is defined in terms of your ability to submit yourself to universally shared moral categories – to think of yourself in third-person moral terms.

There is something right about this approach. It has the compelling result of putting pressure on us to do more for strangers in distress than we tend to do because we’re so often caught up in our own troubles, or those of loved ones. But it also gives rise to objections that ultimately derive from a recognition of the equal value and importance of the first- and second-person perspectives in our moral lives. For example, critics of Kantian deontology point out that respect for a universal reason that manifests in every other human is hardly the same thing as loving concern for this particular person. Critics of utilitarianism, meanwhile, have pointed out that maximising ‘total expected utility’ – ie, getting as large a ‘quantity’ of good results as possible – might require us to, say, harvest someone’s organs when she arrives for a routine check-up at the doctor’s office, since five of her healthy organs could save the lives of five critically ill people. Allowing her to keep her organs will save only a measly one. Though utilitarians and deontologists have come up with many ingenious responses to such objections, these worries follow naturally from a third-person practical perspective, in which each person is viewed as an interchangeable and largely anonymous unit of general rationality or calculable outcomes for the world at large.

An adequate account of the good life requires that all three classes of good are accommodated

But if we think of what matters from the first-person perspective – namely, the individual’s power to govern her own life and express her own unique will – then this kind of approach strikes us as monstrous. Indeed, the approach to moral agency dear to economists and libertarians – rational egoism – swings far in the other direction, insisting that the individual’s power to govern her own life and express her own will is the only thing that is truly valuable, the only thing that can show up as a genuine reason to do anything. According to accounts of this kind – which prioritise the first-person perspective to the exclusion of the others – institutions or persons are immoral insofar as they thwart any individual’s efforts to satisfy her own preferences. All ostensible practical reasons must be understood in terms of the individual’s free pursuit of her preferences if they’re to count as reasons at all.

Again, something about this seems right. Each agent is indeed legitimately claimed by a desire for autonomy and individual success, a basic yearning to satisfy one’s preferences and realise one’s projects. But suggesting that this is the only or the primary source of value – the only legitimate way to answer the question ‘What is best?’ – leads to highly counterintuitive conclusions about the nature of the good life. The main objection is that it completely elides the deeply social nature of good human lives, reducing others to a mere means of satisfying one’s preferences.

In contrast, the truth revealed to us from the second-person perspective is that we treasure others and regularly seek to enable them in their projects and preferences, even at great personal cost. From the second-person perspective, the agent experiences herself as claimed by the value of another person, not as a mere representative of a universal moral category, nor as a useful tool for her own pursuits. The other person is instead experienced as intrinsically valuable. Hence the second-person perspective reveals that even actions that don’t promote one’s own interests can count as reasons.

But the legitimacy of the other two normative domains – the goods of shared world-building and self-expressive autonomy – means that they cannot simply be subordinated to the altruism of the second-person perspective. An adequate account of the good life requires that all three classes of good are accommodated. Though the subordination of the self or the shared political domain to acts of extreme self-sacrifice or charity is a compelling moral ideal advocated by many of the world’s religions, it too distorts the moral picture of what counts as a good human life.

D espite the best efforts of moral theorists to simplify the moral terrain by constraining us to a single perspective on the good – a single source of normative claims to which we’re answerable – doing so invariably results in a picture of human life that neglects some of the sources of value that make a good life good. Each of these normative perspectives offers us a set of distinct reasons that cannot be reduced to or translated into the others without erasing some essential feature of our moral lives.

This means that life confronts us with a fundamental and irresolvable tension. We are tasked with negotiating competing legitimate normative claims – a plurality of goods – with no recourse to an ultimate metric or higher perspective through which to eliminate conflict in answering the basic existential questions to which we’re condemned: who should I be? What should I do? To whom am I beholden?

This shouldn’t prompt us to embrace nihilism , but to recognise the only form that a good life can take for normatively fragmented creatures like ourselves. Leading a good human life – what is sometimes called flourishing – requires that we continuously negotiate these three competing ways of encountering goodness. Flourishing demands achieving a fragile and shifting balance between the different normative terrains. Flourishing is human excellence within each of these domains (self-fulfilment, good relationships, and responsiveness to the demands of a shared world) but achieved in such a way that success in one domain doesn’t unduly compromise success in another.

Well okay, you might be thinking, but how do we know what to do in any particular circumstance? The approach outlined here – which emphasises the irresolvable messiness and conflict at the foundation of our moral lives – seems to have the drawback of not offering sufficient guidance for actually figuring out what one ought to do, at least compared with the resources provided by other moral theories.

But those other approaches succeed in offering guidance by ignoring the moral complexity of being in the grip of an irreducible plurality of goods. This is not to oversimplify these positions, of course. Kantian deontology prioritises the third-person universality of reason, but we can see that it attempts to accommodate the other normative perspectives through the notions of respect for others (the second-person dimension) and respect for self (the first-person dimension). It essentially enjoins us to respect ourselves, respect others, and build a world in which all can be respected. As such, it maps well on to the tripartite moral terrain that I’ve specified above, but it tends to ignore the complexity that results, assuming that all three normative perspectives will subject you to the exact same moral demands.

Everyday moral deliberation involves shifting constantly from one perspective to the other

Similarly, utilitarianism prioritises the third-person norm of universal utility, but it attempts to accommodate the other perspectives through the fact that one’s own preferences don’t automatically trump the other person’s (the second-person dimension) and the fact that the nature of its guiding norm – satisfaction – includes a fundamental reference to the first-personal domain.

But in both cases the intention – an intention that’s understood as realisable – is to provide a decision procedure that stipulates adopting a neutral third-person stance that purportedly captures the normative force of the other two normative domains without remainder. It’s this view that must be questioned.

What engagement with these other theories helps us to recognise is how everyday moral deliberation involves shifting constantly from one perspective to the other in an effort to weigh them against each other, despite their fundamental incommensurability. Imagine that you’re trying to decide whether to quit your job to pursue a less stressful career. The lower pay will make things harder on your family, and you won’t be able to help others as much in the new job. Is it self-indulgent to pursue the easier option when you have the skills to help others, and doing so supports your family? But don’t you deserve a break, too? And the stress is taking a toll on your health and mood, which also affects your family. With the extra time and energy the change affords, you could help out in the community more. What should you do?

These perspective shifts demonstrate that it will almost always be impossible to assess the moral quality of specific acts except against the background of the general tenor of one’s life. In other words, when assessing moral success or failure, the primary target should be lives, not acts. In most cases, a specific act is meaningful only in terms of its place in one’s life as a whole; in terms of the role it plays in the general landscape of competing demands from self, other and world. Are you the kind of person who regularly helps and respects others on both an individual and an institutional level? If yes, then you’re entitled to make some room for your own comfort or pleasure. But if you’re always submitting to the siren call of self-indulgence, then you should think about reallocating your limited resources so that your life better reflects the value of the other two classes of good. Responding well to the criteria of excellence constitutive of each normative domain – being good to ourselves, to others, and to the world – demands negotiation work such that these three classes of competing goods can be accommodated in a coherent way. Hence flourishing requires us to organise our priorities – not simply in the moment, but over the course of our projects, relationships and identities.

Of course, there will be certain lowest common denominators in each normative domain. No amount of good behaviour will ever entitle you to torture others – at least, not if you’re to be counted a good person and your life a good life. But these absolute constraints are few, and few of us find them particularly tempting, at least in their obvious forms. They are therefore incapable of offering sufficient practical guidance when it comes to the choices that most people make in their everyday lives.

T he emphasis on lives, not acts, is a distinctive feature of the virtue-ethical approach in moral theory, according to which our focus should be on a person’s character and life context, not primarily on isolated choices or events. My view, which combines existentialism with virtue ethics, endorses this approach, along with another core feature of virtue ethics: the central place of role models in our moral reasoning. When we feel torn between competing legitimate moral demands both within a normative domain (eg, when we’re claimed by the competing needs of two loved ones) or across domains (eg, when the needs of a loved one compete with the demands of institutional justice), we must think about how to allocate priorities in our lives as a whole, and we regularly take inspiration from the models of excellent lives provided by our moral exemplars. What you choose to do should be guided by your understanding of how those actions shape a life. But understanding how specific actions create a certain kind of life or character is information that we learn mainly by looking to the lives and characters of others. How to find good role models and how to break free of bad ones are of course important questions to address, but those challenges shouldn’t interfere with recognising moral exemplars as a key source of guidance as we navigate this complex moral terrain.

One of the ways in which we learn from others how to succeed at the accommodation and negotiation work made necessary by normative pluralism is in terms of the virtues. The virtues are problem-solving stances through which we address obstacles to human flourishing that are built into the human condition. These obstacles to flourishing include mortality and temporal finitude, material scarcity, and temptations posed by desire for bodily pleasure and aversion to pain. The virtues are character traits – tendencies of seeing, feeling and doing – that enable a good person to respond well to all three normative domains even in the face of these obstacles. For example, patience helps us continue to respond well to self, other, and shared world, despite the temporal limitations that make doing so difficult. By habituating ourselves into these exemplary forms of normative responsiveness, we can better accommodate the different ways that the good reveals itself in our lives. Together with certain absolute prohibitions on a limited set of extreme violations of the good, and moral exemplars who orient us in our striving, the virtues can help us cope with deep structural challenges to flourishing.

The popular ‘combat’ view of morality, wherein agents are constantly torn between immoral desires and the demands of duty, gets much of its plausibility from our normatively plural predicament, which requires us to negotiate conflicts and tensions arising from competing normative resources provided by self, other, and shared world. We are indeed conflicted – torn between comparably legitimate, substantively moral demands – but this is often simply a feature of the messy moral landscape to which we’re condemned, not a sign of intrinsic moral corruption. What might count as a ‘bad intention’ on the combat model is often better understood as the manifestation of another legitimate claim to goodness, one that’s at odds with a value that we ultimately take to have a greater claim to recognition in this context or at this point in our lives. Hence doing what’s right isn’t simply or primarily a matter of silencing an evil desire – though it might be strategically useful to think of goods we can’t realise in this way – but rather a matter of figuring out what’s best now in the context of a well-lived life considered as a whole. And there’s no simple algorithm for knowing how to exercise this moral discernment as we struggle to do justice to all of the sources of value to which we find ourselves answerable.

Am I happy? Am I generous? Am I contributing to the world? The moral struggle we face is finding a way to honestly and accurately answer ‘Yes’ to all three of these questions at once, over the course of a life that presents us with many obstacles to doing so.

To read more on ethical living, visit Psyche , a digital magazine from Aeon that illuminates the human condition through psychological knowhow, philosophical understanding and artistic insight.

Thinkers and theories

Rawls the redeemer

For John Rawls, liberalism was more than a political project: it is the best way to fashion a life that is worthy of happiness

Alexandre Lefebvre

Computing and artificial intelligence

Mere imitation

Generative AI has lately set off public euphoria: the machines have learned to think! But just how intelligent is AI?

Anthropology

Your body is an archive

If human knowledge can disappear so easily, why have so many cultural practices survived without written records?

Helena Miton

Illness and disease

Empowering patient research

For far too long, medicine has ignored the valuable insights that patients have into their own diseases. It is time to listen

Charlotte Blease & Joanne Hunt

Seeing plants anew

The stunningly complex behaviour of plants has led to a new way of thinking about our world: plant philosophy

Stella Sandford

Nations and empires

The paradoxes of Mikha’il Mishaqa

He was a Catholic, then a rationalist, then a Protestant. Most of all, he exemplified the rise of Arab-Ottoman modernity

Albert Jay Nock on “Doing the Right Thing” versus Government

by Richard M. Ebeling

October 1, 2023

It is almost 100 years since the libertarian essayist and social critic Albert Jay Nock (1870–1945) published his essay “On Doing the Right Thing” in the pages of the American Mercury (November 1924). Nowadays, the very title of the essay may seem strange to many modern American readers. The “right thing?” Surely, the right thing is just “doing your own thing.”

Even in 1924, Nock explained that the notion of “doing the right thing” was not present in the thinking of many Americans, though he thought it was still widely prevalent in the minds of many British. Having spent some time in London, he noticed the number of times the phrase, “doing the right thing,” was used and repeated by people going about their everyday affairs. This was observed by Nock regardless of whether the people saying it were members of the working or middle class or among the upper elite.

“A dozen times a day one will hear Englishmen mutter in an apologetic tone,” Nock said, “Beastly bore, you know! — oh, dev’lish bore! — but then, you know, one really must do the Right Thing, mustn’t one?’” Nock immediately saw a connection between this notion of doing the right thing and the idea of individual liberty. In fact, doing the right thing, he said, only had relevance and reality in an environment of extensive personal and economic freedom.

Freedom and three arenas of life

Nock distinguished between three arenas of human conduct. The first was that area of a person’s life most directly influenced by government. There, the actions of the individual are constrained by the necessity to follow what the law proscribes, such things as not killing, stealing from, or defrauding others. That is, the negative constraints of a properly limited government.

The second area of life, given these legal prohibitions, Nock referred to as the matters of personal and “indifferent” choice. Will you wear a green necktie or a red one, or maybe no necktie at all. Will you dress according to social conventions or as the eccentric little concerned about how others may think? Will you furnish you home in Victorian or rustic style? Spend your weekends in a drunken stupor carousing with your equally inebriated friends or teetotallingly sober and focused on mowing your lawn or fixing that squeaky screen door? Whiling away your time in the evening in front of the television or taking night classes to earn the degree that may open the opportunity for a promotion at work?

In a free society, to use some of the lyrics of the old song, “It Ain’t Nobody’s Business If I Do”: If I should take a notion to jump into the ocean, Ain’t nobody’s business if I do. If I go to church on Sunday, then cabaret all day Monday, Ain’t nobody’s business if I do. If my man ain’t got no money and I say, “Take all of mine, honey,” Ain’t nobody’s business if I do. If I give him my last nickel and it leaves me in a pickle, Ain’t nobody’s business if I do….

Finally, there is the third area of life, the one, Nock said, that incorporates “doing the right thing”:

There is a region where conduct is controlled by unenforced, self-imposed allegiance to moral or social consideration. In this region, for instance, one follows the rule of “women and children first,” takes a long risk to get somebody out of a burning house, or, like Sir Philip Sidney, refuses to slake one’s own thirst when there is not water enough to go around.

Giving others their just due

In another essay written around the same time in the mid-1920s, “A Study in Manners,” Nock gave some other examples of what might be considered doing the right thing. In these instances, doing the right thing is treating others with a sense of right or appropriate conduct, even if the law does not require it and you could personally benefit by taking advantage of the situation. That is, in good conscience, does it really seem right not to act or interact in a certain way toward someone else given the circumstances and even if it would be to your advantage? Says Nock:

In stealing an inventor’s purse, let us say, one must reckon with the law; in stealing his idea, one must reckon with the sense of morals, with the common conscience of mankind; in buying up and suppressing his idea or in exploiting it without adequate compensation, one must reckon with the sense of manners, with the fine and high perception established by culture, to which such transactions at once appear mean and low. When Baron Tachnitz paid in full royalties to foreign authors whose works he republished before the days of international copyright, he was governed by a sense of manners; for no law compelled him to pay anything, and the morals of trade would have been quite satisfied if he had paid whatever he chose.

Clearly, in paying whatever might have been standard royalties to authors whose works he republished, Baron Tachnitz was doing what his conscience was telling him was the right thing, even though existing international law did not make it illegal to fail to do so. Suppose the law said that pickpocketing someone’s wallet was illegal, but seeing it fall out of someone’s pocket and not returning it was not theft under the law. “Doing the right thing” would be going up to the person who lost his wallet in this way and handing it back to him, contents intact. To do otherwise would be to take something from another that is their property, without their consent, due to the accident of circumstances.

Doing the right thing in a presidential election

In another interesting example, Nock relates a story about John Jay, one of the writers of The Federalist Papers and then governor of New York State at the time of the 1800 presidential election. John Adams had been elected the second president of the United States in 1796 and was running for reelection against Thomas Jefferson. Adams was running as the Federalist candidate and Jefferson as the Republican. Supporters of Jefferson’s vice-presidential running mate, Aaron Burr, had successfully won the New York legislative elections in 1800, meaning they would be seated as the majority in early 1801; under the then-current practice, this new Republican majority would be selecting the New York Electoral College representatives who would be voting on who would be appointed the next president of the United States, therefore helping to assure that Thomas Jefferson became the third president of the country.

Alexander Hamilton, a supporter of John Adams and strongly anti-Jefferson, wrote to John Jay proposing that as governor of New York he could call a special session of the state legislator while the Federalists still held the majority so that the method by which the electors were chosen could be changed, increasing the certainty that Adams would win a second term in office instead of Jefferson succeeding him. So bitter was the political divide in the country at the time between Federalists and Republicans that Hamilton said in his letter to John Jay, “in times like these in which we live, it will not do to be overscrupulous. It is easy to sacrifice the substantial interests of society by a strict adherence to ordinary rules.” It was not illegal for Jay to call a lame-duck session of the state legislature to change the Electoral College procedure, argued Hamilton, even though it would be seen as an act of abusive political expediency. After all, Hamilton continued, it would “prevent an Atheist in Religion and a Fanatic in politics from getting possession of the helm of State.” A bit of legislative trickery was needed to save the country “from the fangs of Jefferson .”

It seems John Jay never wrote back to Alexander Hamilton after receiving this letter. What is known is that he did not follow the course of political action proposed by Hamilton, but after Jay’s death, it was found that on the backside of Hamilton’s letter, John Jay had written, “Proposing a measure for party purposes which I do not think it would become me to adopt.” That is, while no doubt legal for him to do so as governor and ensuring a major political victory over someone Jay strongly opposed, it would not be “doing the right thing.” It would fly in the face of the legitimate elective procedures and be an inappropriate and abusive use of political power as governor of the state to reverse what otherwise would be the lawful outcome of the presidential election of 1800. Explained Nock:

Governor Jay had unusual ability and the most nearly flawless character probably, of any man in public life of that time…. In principle he was as strong a Federalist as Hamilton himself…. He had a deep distrust of popular government, and viewed the prospective triumph of Mr. Jefferson, the “fanatic of politics,” with apprehension and distaste…. He could quite legally and constitutionally have made the move that Hamilton implored him to make, for the old legislature still had tenure of office for seven or eight weeks…. With his party continued in power at Washington, the Administration would have taken royal good care of him and given him his pick of patronage. Every predilection of his own was in favor of Hamilton’s suggestion. A devout man, he might well have let the end justify the means of keeping a person of Jefferson’s well-known unorthodoxy out of the presidency. Yet he looked at the opportunity and passed it by in silence because he did not think it would be becoming to embrace it.

Cultivating doing the right thing

In the essay “On Doing the Right Thing,” Nock argued that whether it was the liberty to make those everyday choices that primarily effect ourselves or those decisions that embrace, impact, or affect those around us that require us to weigh thinking about and “doing the right thing,” the scope and range of such choices are greatly influenced by the degree to which government intrudes upon or leaves us alone to determine them on our own.

The more that government interferes with these matters, the less range there is for each of us to take responsibility for what we do and how we do it in guiding our own lives and in developing ethical and moral senses concerning our relationships and voluntary obligations and noncompulsory duties to others in society. The development and exercise of these choices, Nock insisted, depends on freedom and the confinement of government to securing each person’s liberty rather than restraining it through various forms of political paternalism. Said Nock:

The practical reason for freedom, then, is that freedom seems to be the only condition under which any kind of substantial moral fiber can be developed. Everything else has been tried, world without end. Going against reason and experience, we have tried law, compulsion, and authoritarianism of various kinds, and the result is nothing to be proud of…. In suggesting that we try freedom, therefore, the anarchist or individualist has a strictly practical aim. He aims at the production of a race of responsible beings. He wants more room for the savoir se gener [knowing how to get along], more scope for the noblesse oblige [the obligations of position], a larger place for the sense of the Right Thing. If our legalists and authoritarians could once get this well through their heads, they would save themselves a vast deal of silly insistence on a half-truth and upon the suppressio veri [lying by omission] which is the meanest and lowest form of misrepresentation. Freedom, for example, as they keep insisting, undoubtedly means freedom to drink oneself to death. The anarchist grants this at once; but at the same time, he points out that also means freedom to say with the gravedigger in Les Misérables , “I have studied, I have graduated; I never drink.” It unquestionably means freedom to go on without any code of morals at all; but it also means freedom to rationalize, construct and adhere to a code of one’s own. The anarchist presses the point invariably overlooked that freedom to do the one without correlative freedom to do the other is impossible; and that just here comes in the moral education which legalism and authoritarianism, with their denial of freedom, can never furnish.

Free choice and doing the right thing

In nineteenth-century America, during a time when government played a much smaller part in people’s everyday lives than is the case today, it was taken for granted that not only were personal and family affairs the responsibility of individuals but that there was a far greater sense of obligation and duty to “do the right thing” concerning the problems of society. For instance, in a famous passage in volume 2 of Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America (1840), he highlighted the extent to which Americans took upon themselves the voluntary forming of associations and organizations to foster and cultivate improvements in society, including hospitals, orphanages, fire departments, charities for those who had fallen upon hard times, and philanthropic activities for religious and secular education and training to assist people in becoming more self-supporting. Tocqueville believed that Europeans, so used to relying upon and turning to the state to take care of such matters, should take note of the American example of the opposite.

A Polish political dissident, Count Adam Gurowski (1805–1866), who had come to America in 1849, published a book in 1857 entitled America and Europe in which he compared the two. He drew attention to how much of the most beneficial and generous improvements in the United States had nothing to do with the government and were almost solely due to the private initiative and actions of individuals and voluntary associations. All the types of things that Nock had categorized under personal choice and doing the right thing with and toward others were what Adam Gurowski drew our attention to:

Everything great, beneficial, useful in America, is accomplished without the action of the so-called government, notwithstanding even its popular, self-governing character. Individual impulses, private enterprise, association, free activity, the initiative pouring everlasting from within the people, are mostly substituted here for what in European societies and nations forms the task of governments…. By far the larger number of monuments, works and useful establishments, for industry, trade, for facilitating and spreading tuition and mental culture, universities, schools, and scientific establishments, are created and endowed by private enterprise, by private association, and by individual munificence…. Neither individuals separately, nor the aggregated people look to the government for such creations; private associations and enterprise, these corollaries of self-government — untrammeled by government action — have covered the land [with progress]…. All this could not have been miraculously carried out, if the American people had been accustomed to look to government for the initiative, instead of taking it themselves. Without the self-governing impulse, America would be materially and socially a wilderness.

Pervasive presence of government

Nock observed even in 1924:

I remember seeing recently a calculation that the poor American is staggering along under a burden of some two million laws; and obviously, where there are so many laws, it is hardly possible to conceive of any items of conduct escaping contact with one or more of them. Thus, the region where conduct is controlled by law so far encroaches upon the region of free choice and the region where conduct is controlled by a sense of the Right Thing, that there is precious little left of either.

If this was anywhere near the truth a hundred years ago, what is to be said about the arenas of completely free action in the America of today? Our movements are surveilled, and our language is policed. Our associations with others are monitored and held up to criticism and “cancellation.” We have little responsibility for the raising and educating of our own children, and how we attempt to do it is subject to intervention by government social workers, including removal of a child from the parent’s care.

Our words and actions, past and present, hang over our heads to be scrutinized and criticized like the sword of Damocles that may fall at any time and destroy the remainder of our lives. Picking a necktie to wear can get you persecuted and maybe even prosecuted for being supposedly “phobic” about something or violating the “political correctness” of the time.  And watch out about the song you hum or the joke you laugh at. You better not be caught watching YouTube videos of Rodney Dangerfield, Joan Rivers, or Don Rickles. George Carlin is okay, so long as it’s not one of his videos in which he is criticizing the environmentalists or the political and corrupt paternalistic busybodies manning the halls of government power. Otherwise, you are likely to be labelled homophobic, racist, sexist, an enemy of “the planet,” or insensitive to the feelings and “safe spaces” of others. That laugh may be your last.

At the same time, government regulates how businesses are run, and how workers employed are hired, paid, and fired. This includes what is produced, how it is produced and sold, and under what terms of sale, all of which are dictated by swarms of bureaucrats at all levels of government. Taxes consume anywhere between 25 percent and 50 percent of many people’s income, if you add together federal, state, and local taxes.

Self-responsibility and doing the right thing

The interventionist-redistributive state pervades so much of society that it is estimated that nearly 50 percent of Americans receive a monetary or “in-kind” transfer from others through the conduit of government, taking from the Peters to give to the Pauls of the country. How are people to have the financial wherewithal to take greater responsibility for their own lives and cultivate this in their children when not only education but health care, medical insurance, and retirement have been taken out of the hands of the individual and moved into the “care” of government?

This also increasingly limits the monetary means of people “doing the right thing.” More than 70 years ago, Bertrand de Jouvenel warned of the consequences in The Ethics of Redistribution (1951). Denying an individual the honest income and wealth he has earned means denying him the ability to formulate and give expression to his own purposes as a human being. You deny him the capacity to make his voluntary contribution to the civilization and society in which he lives as he sees best. Income is not merely a means for physical maintenance of oneself and one’s family, plus a few dollars for leisure activities. What we do with our income is an expression of ourselves, a statement about what we value, how we see ourselves, and what we wish and hope to be. The way we use our income also enables us to teach future generations about those things which are considered worthwhile in life. Our own earned income provides the means to perform many activities through donations and free time that are considered the foundation of the social order, from community and church work to support for the arts and humanities. In other words, the many things that make up, as a good citizen of society, the capacity of “doing the right thing.”

When government replaces the free marketplace with subsidies, cushy contracts, and trade protections from foreign and domestic competition, picking someone else’s pocket no longer becomes illegal or seems unethical. These days, a seemingly “normal” way of acquiring income is having access to other people’s money through government redistribution.

Rejecting protectionism to do the right thing

Back in the 1960s, I recall reading an article on the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal by a businessman named William Law, who owned and operated a tannery company in Wisconsin. He said that he opposed a protectionist trade bill being sponsored by other enterprises in the tannery business because it would artificially raise the price of imported goods and secure a larger market and profit margin for the domestic firms in his industry by limiting the foreign competition. He explained that he did not want to be acquiring ill-gotten gains by politically raising prices above a more market-determined price; this would amount to picking the pockets of American consumers for the tannery industry’s special interest.

Mr. Law went on to say that he would rather go out of business in a free market than prosper on a government-manipulated market at the expense of foreign rivals and domestic consumers. In other words, in William Law’s eyes, gaining profits through government protectionism would not be doing the right thing; instead, it would be the very opposite. Or to use John Jay’s phrase, it would not “become him” to endorse or accept such a political privilege at other people’s expense.

For some others, nowadays, the honesty and consistency of their words and actions no longer seem to matter. Elon Musk has insisted that he values unbridled freedom of speech as the owner of Twitter, but during a trip to China in July 2023 connected to his Tesla production and sales activities in that country, he pledged allegiance to the Communist Party’s “core socialist values” in pricing his electric cars under the dictatorial regime of Xi Jinping. “Doing the right thing” in America in rhetorically defending free speech, obviously, is different from what seems to be the right thing for his sales and profits in a fascist-type economy (government control and command over private businesses) in communist China.

Not doing the right thing in American politics

A good number of years ago, I asked a free market–oriented Texas member of the U.S. House of Representatives what had he found most surprising when he first came to Washington, D.C., after being elected by the voters in his district. He replied that it was the discovery that there were two arguments, if made as part of his remarks about legislation being discussed on the floor of the House of Representatives, that resulted in his congressional colleagues laughing at him and not taking him seriously. The two arguments concerning any legislation or other matters being debated that got you ignored and laughed at were: it’s unconstitutional and it’s immoral.

In other words, there is no “doing the right thing” in politics or not doing something because it would not be “becoming,” as John Jay decided in 1800. There are far too many in the politically connected business world that believe there is no “right thing” or anything unbecoming in following the pursuit of gains; it does not matter if it violates others’ freedom of choice and opportunity or requires cozying up to tyrants and terrorists to assure market share or protection from competitors.

But why should we be surprised? When we are told that there are no rights and wrongs in politics or life in general, that it is all about how you “feel” and what you want, with nothing constrained by custom, tradition, “good conscience,” or respect for the rights, liberty, and property of others, what else should we expect? Back in the early 1990s, I was invited to speak at several conventions of the State Farm Bureau Association. I found an interesting difference in generational attitudes among the farmers with whom I spoke to about government intervention in the agricultural sector.

If someone, at that time, was, say, over 50 or 60 years old, and I asked them if they supported government farm subsidies of various types, including being paid by Uncle Sam for not growing anything at all, many of them said, “No.” If there was a way to do away with these government programs so no one had an unfair advantage of getting government money while other farmers did not, they would, in principle, be glad to see the end of them.

However, when I asked the same question of the younger farmers, those especially under 40 years of age, they for the most part did not even understand my question. In their minds, having grown up and operated under the network of government farm programs, they could not understand why receiving subsidies and other political supports from the government was any different than revenues earned from producing and selling farm products wanted and paid for by consumers interested in what they had for sale.

The greater the intrusiveness of government over people’s lives, the smaller the areas of life left to people for freedom of choice and self-responsibility. The narrower the range of individual decision-making, the less the need for people to weigh and act upon what used to be called “doing the right thing” both in the marketplace and the wider social arena of human association. This is why it is important to halt and reverse the size and scope of government in society. Otherwise, both liberty and responsibility as ideas and in actions may disappear.

This article was originally published in the October 2023 edition of Future of Freedom .

Amy Rees Anderson

Do What Is Right, Not What Is Easy

‘When you do the right things in the right way,     you have nothing to lose because you have nothing to fear.” – Zig Ziglar

Today I was reminded how important it is to stand up for what is right, even when it isn’t easy. I was also reminded that it can take a lot of courage to stand up for what’s right when you are in a situation that requires you to stand alone. But no matter how intimidating a situation is or how afraid you might be – it is ALWAYS worth it to do the right thing – ALWAYS!

Today I watched as someone who should know right from wrong tried to pretend that they were unaware of what was right, even with mountains of what was true sitting in front of them, all while justifying their actions by positioning that they are just doing their job. I wanted to scream out loud, “That doesn’t make it right!” Truth is truth. Right is right and wrong is wrong, and there just isn’t a right reason to do the wrong thing.

It’s so easy for people to get sucked into situations where start thinking you can justify doing the wrong thing in order to get the right result you hope for. I just think we have to do everything in our power not to let ourselves get sucked into that trap. We have to constantly remember that no result is ever worth doing the wrong thing for….period.

When we are willing to stand up for what is right and uphold the truth we can walk away without regrets, regardless of the outcome. Because right is right and at the end of the day all that matters is that we live our life with integrity because our integrity defines who we truly are.

“People of character do the right thing even if no one else does, not because they think it will change the world, but because they refuse to be changed by the world.”    -Michael Josephson

I love that quote and I for one refuse to be changed by the world so here’s to doing the right thing 🙂

16 Comments

Agreed 100%

This honestly made me a better me

I love this and I truely think that is poet is a message to people

To paraphrase the Ford slogan: Integrity is Job One!

So we live on a small farm with a barn and arena we rent out. A horse trainer rented the entire set up for a good chunk of money every month. Unfortunately, it appeared to me and my daughter that many times the horses in training were short on water in the middle of summer. I hoped that it wasn’t some sort of method to “break down” the tough horses. I brought up the issue with the trainer, that horses need to have water available at all times. I still hope that he wasn’t trying to take training short cuts with this method, but within a few days he had packed up all the horses, equipment and moved to a new place. So, my pointing out the water problem may have cost me the monthly rent, but I felt it was the right thing to do.

Do what is right, not what is easy

I love that …thanks Amy

Tnx Amy this letter make me learn

THis was so perfect for me today. Thank you

Thanks for the encouragement amy #thank you amy

I need example for that quote

Bill Gates once said that he would always “hire a lazy person to do a difficult job” at Microsoft. Why? “Because a lazy person will find an easy way to do it.”

can you equate

It means that lazy person are smart enough to have their own method of finishing task fast than others. However, it doesn’t mean that they are doing it the wrong way. Doing something wrong will eventually to something worst.

Amy your a real inspiration! I’ll for sure get a 100 on my essay about courage!

I love you Amy ❤️❤️

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• What 50 Years Have Taught Me
• The Shock Of Learning You Are Losing Someone You Love
• Don’t Leave Decisions To Eeny Meeny Miny Moe
• Kindred Spirits You’re Destined To Meet
• A Brilliant Strategy For Growing A Business
• Customer Service is EVERYTHING!
• You’re Never Too Old To Need Your Parents
• Valuable Advice For Husbands
• When Good People Come Together, Great Things Happen
• We Won’t Accomplish Anything Spectacular Until We Attempt To DO Something Spectacular
• September 2021
• February 2021
• January 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• September 2020
• August 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• October 2019
• September 2019
• August 2019
• February 2019
• January 2019
• December 2018
• November 2018
• October 2018
• September 2018
• August 2018
• February 2018
• January 2018
• December 2017
• November 2017
• October 2017
• September 2017
• August 2017
• February 2017
• January 2017
• December 2016
• November 2016
• October 2016
• September 2016
• August 2016
• February 2016
• January 2016
• December 2015
• November 2015
• October 2015
• September 2015
• August 2015
• February 2015
• January 2015
• December 2014
• November 2014
• October 2014
• September 2014
• August 2014
• February 2014
• January 2014
• December 2013
• November 2013
• October 2013
• September 2013
• August 2013
• February 2013
• January 2013
• December 2012
• November 2012
• October 2012
• September 2012
• August 2012

Get Amy's Blog posts sent in your inbox

Subscribe to RSS Feed for Amy's blog

© 2012 Amy Rees Anderson

Follow Amy Rees Anderson's Blog

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers

Life at OSU

• Unsung Heroes

Doing the right thing is rarely easy, but always worth it.

Students speak up in class on injustice and resistance..

Dwaine Plaza knew the name of the class, African American Resistance in the Era of Donald Trump, would not go unnoticed. 

That was by design.

“I wanted the class to get attention,” he says. “But the class is really about helping students see the historical parallels in African Americans’ current social, economic and political conditions, and how they will figure out how to resist.” 

Plaza, who is Afro Caribbean, actually taught an iteration of the class long before Trump filed candidacy papers in 2015, but it had gone dormant in 2012. Plaza and CLA advisor and co-teacher Marilyn Stewart, who is African American, decided to resurrect the class the day after Trump won the presidency in 2016.  

“Racial tensions have never disappeared and have escalated recently, but there is an intentional effort not to teach these topics with the hope they will go away,” Plaza says. “The past doesn’t just go away. You can still see evidence of how racism expresses itself today in where people live, what opportunities people have, education systems, health care systems, real estate patterns. American culture tells us to live in the ‘now.’ But when you forget about the past, anything can be repeated.”

CLA Dean Larry Rodgers joined Stewart and Plaza to teach the winter-term class. Rodgers’ academic expertise is in multicultural and regional American literature, particularly the Great Migration of southern African Americans throughout the 20th century. 

In addition to literature, Plaza, Stewart and Rodgers built the class to look at African American resistance in sports, art, music, film and policy. 

Think Colin Kaepernick, whose controversial kneeling during the national anthem echoes African American athletes Tommie Smith and John Carlos’ Black Power salute on the medal stand at the 1968 Olympics. Think Dr. Martin Luther King and Angela Davis. Think millions of African Americans rejecting the Jim Crow South, moving to cities like Chicago, New York and Los Angeles and leaving an artistic imprint that is still bearing fruit. 

“Resistance became about ways African Americans would not let the lens of white supremacy define them,” says Plaza. “They found a way of resisting in a situation that seemed hopeless.”

For JoyAnna Virtue, who is white, the class has been a revelation. Injustice was not something that presented itself often in her home-schooled, computer-based curriculum. “A lot of things that are common knowledge are new to me, like lynching or the history of slavery and its relation to the treatment of black bodies in sports,” she says. 

Though some of the names and dates are new, the concepts are familiar for Capreece Kelsaw, a junior majoring in political science. Growing up African American in Portland, Kelsaw saw — through her own experiences and personal reading — many of the injustices the class examines. 

“Things are more modern now, but the issues are the same: Black people still get killed and disenfranchised, are imprisoned more and portrayed unfairly in the media. They deal with more injustice in the education and health care systems,” she says. 

Knowing that some of her classmates are hearing about these issues for the first time can be frustrating, Kelsaw admits. But it’s encouraging, too. 

“We spend a lot of time talking about race and the history of African Americans. It’s not really common on campus. This class is one of the better options to do that,” Kelsaw says. “People are more willing to speak compared to the beginning of the class, and that’s cool.” 

An atmosphere where students — regardless of race — would contribute in a class about race and racism required Stewart, Plaza and Rodgers to consciously set a stage.   

“We very deliberately created a space where all students would feel safe talking. It’s a very difficult thing to do,” Stewart says. “These are not topics we talk about every day. We shaped our environment so students and guests would feel comfortable with backlash regarding what they were saying. We created the class to have historical context, but we wanted students to see and voice other similarities from this era. We wanted students to be able to learn something from someone with opposing views and not try to shout someone down.” 

For Brooke Bishop, who is white, and whose goal is to become an English teacher, these conversations are hopeful. 

“There’s something really cool about being in such a diverse room, including the teaching team. You’re seeing all sorts of people raising consciousness. Some have lived what we are talking about. Some want to learn. It gives me hope people can have common ground without color blindness — that we can understand differences instead of burying them.”

Contact Info

Grab a feed of news and stories for your site.

Why You Should Do the Right Thing, and How to Do It

One of the hardest things to do in life is to do the right thing. What you think is the right thing. Not what you friends, family, teachers, boss and society thinks is the right thing.

What is the right thing? That’s up to you to decide. Often you have a little voice in your head that tells what the right thing is. Or a gut feeling.

It might tell you to get up from the couch, stop eating those snacks and go to the gym instead. Sometimes you will put on your exercise clothes and go. Sometimes you will not.

It might tell you to stop sulking and feeling like a victim with everything against you and instead look at the opportunities and take action. Sometimes you will. Sometimes you will not.

Now, why should you do the right thing? Here are three excellent reasons:

1. You tend to get what you give.

By doing the right thing you tend to get the same things back. Give value to people, help them and they will often want to help you and give you value in some form. Not everyone will do it but many will. Not always right away but somewhere down the line. Things tend to even out. Do the right thing, put in the extra effort and you tend to get good stuff back. Don’t do it and you tend to get less good stuff back from the world.

2. To raise your self-esteem.

This is a really important point. When you don’t do the right thing you are not only sending out signals out into your world. You are also sending signals to yourself. When you don’t do the right thing you don’t feel good about yourself. You may experience emptiness or get stuck in negative thought loops. Its like you are letting yourself down. You are telling yourself that you cant handle doing the right thing. To not do the right thing is a bit like punching yourself in the stomach.

3. To avoid self-sabotage.

A powerful side effect of not doing the right thing is that you give yourself a lack of deservedness. This can really screw up you and your success. If you don’t do the right thing in your life then you won’t feel like you deserve the success that you may be on your way towards or experiencing right now. So you start to self-sabotage, perhaps deliberately or through unconscious thoughts.

If you on some level don’t think that you are a person who deserves the success you want then you will probably find a way to sabotage that success. You may rationalize it as being about something else or what someone else did. But oftentimes it’s just you standing in your own way. By doing the right thing your can raise your self-esteem and feel like a person who deserves his/her success.

How to do it

Here are a few suggestions that can hopefully help you to do the right thing more often.

Review the reasons why you are doing it.

Whenever you feel unsure about doing the right thing remind yourself of the powerful reasons above (or any other that you can come up with). They might give you that extra push of motivation you need to spring into action.

Go for improvement. Not perfection.

I’m not saying you will do the right thing all the time. I certainly don’t. But I’m saying that we can strive for gradual improvement. If you for instance do the right thing 10 percent of the time right now then try to doing it 20 percent of the time. And then 30 percent. Or you can try to do the right thing at as many opportunities as you find this week. Try some stuff and see works best for you.

My point is just to not get stuck in thinking about perfection or being some kind of saint. This can paralyse you from taking any action at all. Or leave you with negative feelings despite doing the right thing many, many times (since you are still not feeling like you are not quite perfect).

If you seldom do what you feel/think is the right thing now then you will probably not be able to change this completely over the weekend. It might take some time.

Just do it.

The more you think about these things, the more often you tend to come up with reasons to not do it. You need to think but not over think since that often traps you in analysis paralysis. To raise your self-esteem and get a spiral of positive action spinning in your world and with the people around you need to start moving and take action.

Taking the route of doing the right thing takes more effort and can be more painful. It’s often seemingly the harder thing to do.

But when you understand how you are hurting yourself it gets a lot harder to just avoid doing the right thing. The perceived advantages of not doing the right thing – such as it being easier — tend to lose their power and are replaced with a more clearer understanding of what you are doing to yourself and others.

Taking this – perhaps a little less travelled – path is a lot more rewarding than taking the easy way out. Both for you and for the world around you.

Free Exclusive Happiness Tips

Subscribe to The Positivity Newsletter and get weekly tips on happiness, self-esteem and plenty more.

About the Author

Comments on this entry are closed.

Sometimes people think that if they get the benefit first, then they will do something for others. It doesn’t work that way, only if we give out things to others, then we are in a better position to receive.

Cheers Vincent Personal Development Blogger

Great post (and very relevant for me at the moment).

One feeling that often comes up in these situations for me is guilt. That is an awful feeling and also rather a waste of time. I think that that is often an indication of society’s ideas being an influence.

Another thing that I feel is important is to not look back once you have made the decision (you’ve decided but you are still deciding!). I often fall into that trap and that is of no benefit at all.

I especially like the improvement not perfection thing – that’s definitely what I practice, and when I worked as a Professional Organizer, the industry’s unofficial motto was “professional, not perfect.”

@Maria We are the sum of our cultural influences but we are also our own people. To me, the only way to know is to try it out. If it fits for you because you want it regardless of the approval or disapproval of anyone else, then that’s your voice. When you stop caring about the judgment of others, then you’ve found your voice. I’m still working on that one, but as I said above, I’m all about improvement, not perfection. ;)

Very good post.

Doing the right thing for yourself and towards others certainly makes us better people. Building up our self-esteem is Awesome but what’s even greater is Self-Acceptance, being TRUE to you. When we’re True to ourselves, we’re True to others, and in turn its not as difficult to do the right things. Even when it comes to listening to the little voice in our heads. If you remain True to yourself, the little voice will only be leading you into the right direction. :-)

Many Blessings…. Hugo and Roxanne ~ Believe Achieve ~

You know what will be the sure fire solution to doing the right thing? Telling yourself the truth. Yes, those ten pounds you have gained make a difference and without going to the gym you will not lose it. And by the way, if you don’t lose that ten pounds now, it will be twenty pounds this time next year.

If you hate your job, truly hate your job, you are not going to like it any better next week or next year, be honest with yourself and go find something else, you and your coworkers will be really happy about that, don’t think they can’t tell you are miserable.

I would say your are spot on with the “Just Do It” it is the only way to do the right thing.

Cheers, Tabs

Doing the right thing definitely raises my self esteem. When I’m not honest or when I don’t act with love and kindness it weighs on my mind. There’s only so much room in the attic, so to speak: the more garbage that’s in my mind the less likely I am to feel good. I’m with Hugo and Roxanne regarding the little voice. The committee in my head needs subject matter, and it will take whatever I give them whether it’s negative or positive.

Thanks for a good post! Jenn

What a great article! Thank you….we all need a good reminder to try to strive to be the best person we can, remain positive at all times and just do the right thing- be a good friend and that person we want deep down but loose in the chaos of today’s life!

I was recently given a terrific gift which also speaks to these qualities. It is called The Friendship Stone. I was so touched when someone I met at Starbucks gave me one! It is kind of like the pay-it-forward idea in that this stone helps connect people and say ‘thank you’. I saw this person was having a hard time getting connected with the WI-FI at the table next to me so I offered to help. We struck up a conversation, ‘connected’ and then before he left, he gave me this Friendship Stone. He explained it was about passing it on to others and to remind us that the simple things (like what I did for him he said) and people is what matters in life – cool huh?! He said it is also about staying positive and giving to others. So, there you go….I gave to him and he gave to me and it goes on from there. Now I will always remember this encounter and that it is key to always try to be better, do the right thing and to just give of myself —even to help “strangers” – not to be strangers for long. :) He told me there’s a great website that explains about it: http://www.thefriendshipstone.com

It always sounds so simple.Look through the eyes of the man that scorches in hell for years and tell me if he would have selflessness to do the right thing and override his instinctive need for survival.

The Truth of the matter is its all a myth,its possible by psychologically reprogramming to destroy guilt and be happy.

let me ask you if you had a choice either your family dies or 100 innocent people.what would you choose?.Either choice you choose you will walk through life with guilt.What about soldiers who return from the frontline with blood on their hands to protect their nations.

for the record alot of what this blog says is right but i am coming from a different place here.90% of us have the lovely habit of formulating destructive questions in our minds,heres a tip for the lazy ones just use your negative thinking on your negative thought and doubt them till they put their tails between their legs and skip of like fairies.

interesting…

been there done that

Next post: 5 Kick-Ass Reasons to Use a Journal, and How to Do It

Previous post: How to Be Bold

I’m Henrik Edberg.

Since 2006 I’ve written about self-esteem and  happiness and much more.

[ Click here to learn more about me and this website…]

POPULAR POSTS:

– 7 Habits of Unhappy People – 101 Self-Esteem Quotes – How to Stop Being So Lazy – 32 Ways to Motivate Yourself – How to Overcome Failure – 13 Ways to Overcome Self-Doubt – How to Stop Overthinking – Words of Encouragement – How to Start a Successful Blog – 19 Ways to Stay Positive – Inspirational Quotes for Work – 141 Love Quotes – What to Do When Life Sucks – Moving Forward Quotes and Tips – How to Find Inner Peace – 136 Friendship Quotes – 73 Quotes on Fear

Home | Contact | Search | Archive | Free Email Updates | Privacy Policy

Copyright Henrik Edberg 2006-2024

Sam Thomas Davies

The Easy Thing Versus The Right Thing: Which Do You Choose?

by Sam Thomas Davies | Last updated: July 5, 2021 | Filed Under: Self-Improvement

One of the most common, yet highly unrecognized sticking points in behavior change is isolating incidents .

In his book,  The Miracle Morning , Hal Elrod writes,

We mistakenly assume that each choice we make, and each individual action we make, is only affecting that particular moment, or circumstance. [1]

But it isn’t. The workout we skip. The project we procrastinate on. The meeting we cancel. They’re all marginal losses . They compound, and while they’re imperceptible and inconsequential to us today, one day, we’ll have no choice but to take notice.

The choice to say yes to comfort and no to stretching yourself affects more than one incident: it becomes a cause set in motion, a reason to perpetuate undesired behaviors again and again.

Ultimately, you have a choice between…

The Easy Thing and The Right Thing

“Every time you choose to do the easy thing, instead of the right thing, you are shaping your identity”, writes Elrod, “[you’re] becoming the type of person who does what’s easy, rather than what’s right”.

If you want to move towards where you want to be, you need to do what’s right. This is how self-discipline is built. You make time and lay one brick at a time—especially when you don’t feel like it.

Take waking up for example. When the alarm clock goes off, you have a choice: you can either hit the snooze button and go back to sleep (the easy thing) or you can do something different. You can get out of bed and achieve your goals, exercise, meditate, read, etc. (the right thing).

How to Minimise Isolating Incidents

To stop isolating incidents, we must look beyond immediate gratification and see the big picture.

Remember: everything we do today affects who we become tomorrow.

This is what directly determines the quality of our lives.

Here’s how you can minimize isolating incidents…

1. Have a “To Stop” list. In his book, What Got You Here Won’t Get You There , Marshall Goldsmith recommends replacing a traditional “To Do” list with a “To Stop” list. Identify what behavior you want to stop and commit to doing the right thing instead.

2. Decide the type of person you want to be. Do you want to be the type of person who sets and achieves goals? Builds discipline? Says no to the unessential? When you know the type of person you want to become, you don’t take isolated incidents lightly. Yes, you still feel tempted to binge eat, surf online and bite your fingernails, but you don’t yield to them. You remind yourself they’re not the behaviors of the type of person you’re becoming.

3. Identify your Why. But it isn’t as simple as deciding the type of person you want to become, is it? That’s why you must identify your Why. Why do you want to lose 14 pounds? Run a half marathon? Start a business? You want to do it because of how it will make you feel . Know your why and the how will follow.

Don’t do the easy thing; do the right thing.

Like What You've Read?

Get practical, research-based ideas for living a good life delivered straight to your inbox every Monday.

April 27, 2018 at 11:23 pm

Often times, the easy thing, what the body is longing, is at times beneficial in my experience.

I’ve been that robotic machine who always does what he’s supposed to, whether I feel like it or not. However, I believe that in times when we don’t really feel like doing it, going ahead anyhow and displaying that picture of the WHY in your head on your way to doing so is a way to ease the shift of pace.

We ALWAYS have the choice to do the EASY or the RIGHT yet, 95% of the population have followed the EASY life, the life through the motions, and don’t really feel that such life is actually the one we are meant to be living.

It may be hard to do the RIGHT thing at first, but as everything, most things are difficult before they become easy. Its jus the initial phase.

Break through the darkness, and shine the light you’re meant to be in this world.

April 28, 2018 at 1:22 pm

Great insight, David. 🙂

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Mind by Design

Doing the Right Thing when no one is looking: The Power of Integrity, Even When No One is Watching 

In a world that often seems driven by self-interest and instant gratification, the concept of doing the right thing might appear to be overshadowed by personal gain. However, the truth remains that integrity is an indispensable virtue that defines our character and influences our choices, even when no one is looking.

As C.S. Lewis once wisely stated, “Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching.” In this article, we will explore the profound significance of choosing the right path, not only when you’re being observed, but especially when you think no one is watching. We’ll delve into the reasons to prioritize ethical behavior, how it can positively impact your personal and professional life, and why it’s worth considering, even when it seems no one else is.

Reasons to Do the Right Thing, Even When No One is Looking

Upholding personal integrity.

At its core, integrity is the foundation of our character. It reflects the alignment between our actions, values, and beliefs. While it’s tempting to think that our actions only matter when others are present, it’s crucial to remember that every choice we make contributes to the shaping of our identity. A person of integrity understands that their behavior isn’t just a response to external expectations but an indicator of their personal values. When you consistently do the right thing, even when no one is watching, you build a strong sense of self-respect and self-esteem. These internal rewards are invaluable and can lead to greater overall well-being.

Impact on Relationships and Friendship

Ethical behavior extends beyond the individual . It has a significant impact on the relationships we build, especially in friendships. When you consistently demonstrate integrity, your friends and peers recognize your authenticity and trustworthiness. This fosters a deeper bond based on mutual respect and honesty. Choosing the right thing , even when no one is watching, strengthens the foundation of trust within friendships, making them more resilient and meaningful. After all, being able to trust a friend who does the right thing, regardless of the circumstances, is a rare and valuable trait.

Motivating Others and Setting an Example

Behavior is contagious. When you consistently do the right thing, even when nobody else seems to notice, you become a beacon of ethical behavior for others. Your actions inspire and motivate those around you to follow suit. Imagine the positive influence you can have on your family, friends, colleagues, and even strangers by demonstrating the importance of integrity through your actions. By acting as a role model , you contribute to a culture of ethical behavior that can create a ripple effect in your community and beyond.

Enhancing Mental and Physical Health

Choosing to do the right thing, regardless of the circumstances, has a profound impact on your mental and physical health. Acting in alignment with your values reduces feelings of guilt, anxiety, and stress. When you know you’ve made ethical choices, you’re less likely to be haunted by regrets, allowing you to enjoy greater peace of mind. Moreover, studies have shown that people who consistently engage in ethical behavior tend to experience better physical health. This connection between ethical behavior and well-being highlights the importance of making decisions that prioritize both our mental and physical health.

Doing the Right Thing Even When No One is Watching: Practical Applications

Ethical decision-making in the workplace.

In a professional setting, making the right choice can be challenging, especially when personal gain is on the line. However, acting ethically is not only a matter of personal integrity but also a reflection of professional standards. Upholding integrity in the workplace can lead to increased trust from colleagues, superiors, and stakeholders. It can also foster a healthier work environment, where individuals feel valued and respected. Moreover, consistently choosing the right thing, even when nobody else is looking, can help you build a reputation as a reliable and ethical professional, opening doors for career growth and opportunities.

The Role of Integrity in Relationships

Integrity plays a pivotal role in relationships. Whether it’s with family, friends, or romantic partners, being true to your values and consistently doing the right thing can cultivate deeper connections. Honesty, trust, and respect are essential components of any healthy relationship, and they stem from a commitment to ethical behavior. Even when you’re facing difficult decisions or tempted to take shortcuts, remember that the foundation of a strong relationship is built on integrity. By prioritizing the right thing, you nurture bonds that stand the test of time.

Personal Growth and Development

Choosing the right thing, even when nobody else is watching, is a powerful catalyst for personal growth . Every ethical decision you make contributes to your own development, helping you refine your sense of self and values. It also challenges you to confront your fears and biases, enabling you to become a more compassionate and open-minded individual . Through these experiences, you become better equipped to face moral dilemmas, and your decision-making becomes more aligned with your core principles.

In Conclusion

In a world where shortcuts and quick gains may seem tempting, choosing to do the right thing, even when no one is watching, is a mark of true character. Upholding integrity not only reflects your personal values but also influences the people and world around you. By consistently acting ethically, you inspire others, build deeper relationships, and experience greater mental and physical well-being. Remember, integrity is not just about doing the right thing when you’re being observed; it’s about who you are when nobody else is looking.

Key Takeaways:

• Integrity Matters : Upholding personal integrity , even when nobody is watching, shapes your character and builds self-respect.
• Relationships Benefit : Ethical behavior strengthens relationships, fosters trust, and sets a positive example for others.
• Motivation and Influence : Doing the right thing inspires others and contributes to a culture of ethical behavior.
• Mental and Physical Health : Choosing ethical actions improves mental and physical well-being, reducing stress and promoting a healthier lifestyle.
• Workplace and Personal Growth : Ethical choices enhance your professional reputation and contribute to personal growth and development.

Remember, every decision you make, even when you think no one is watching, defines the person you are and the legacy you leave behind. As Aldo Leopold once said, “Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching—even when doing the wrong thing is legal.” It’s a reminder that our actions have a far-reaching impact, and the world becomes a better place when individuals choose integrity over convenience.

Q: What does it mean to do the right thing when no one is looking?

A: Doing the right thing when no one is looking refers to acting with integrity and making ethical decisions even when there is no external pressure or observation. It is about following your own moral compass and doing what you believe is right, regardless of whether anyone else is watching.

Q: Why is doing the right thing important?

A: Doing the right thing is important because it aligns with our values and helps us maintain our self-respect . It also contributes to a better society and promotes trust and fairness. Acting ethically can empower us and make us feel good about ourselves.

Q: How does doing the right thing make you feel?

A: Doing the right thing can make you feel good about yourself. It gives you a sense of satisfaction and inner peace, knowing that you have acted in accordance with your values and principles. It can also increase your self-esteem and confidence.

Q: Can doing the right thing motivate others?

A: Yes, doing the right thing can serve as a source of motivation for others. When people see someone consistently making ethical choices and behaving with integrity, it can inspire them to do the same. Leading by example and displaying good character can have a positive influence on those around you.

Q: How does friendship influence doing the right thing?

A: Friendship can play a significant role in doing the right thing. Good friends can provide support and encouragement to make ethical decisions, and they can hold you accountable for your actions. Surrounding yourself with friends who share similar values can help reinforce your commitment to doing what’s right.

Q: Why does it really matter to do the right thing even when nobody is looking?

A: Doing the right thing even when nobody is looking is important because it reflects your true character. It demonstrates that your ethical behavior is not dependent on external rewards or consequences, but rather a genuine desire to do what is right. It showcases your integrity and values, regardless of the presence or absence of others.

Q: What does “ethical behavior” mean?

A: “Ethical behavior” refers to actions that are morally right and aligned with accepted principles of conduct. It involves making choices that consider the well-being of others and adhering to established standards of fairness, honesty, and respect. Ethical behavior promotes trust, mutual respect, and the betterment of society .

Q: Does doing the right thing when nobody’s watching mean that you don’t care about what others think?

A: No, doing the right thing when nobody’s watching doesn’t mean that you don’t care about what others think. It mean

Similar Posts

17 Amazing Benefits of a Growth Mindset

Have you ever had a growth mindset? A growth mindset is a theory that posits that learning and personal development can happen at any age, giving people the power to change and grow their lives with ease. It’s about more than motivation and self-esteem – it also impacts how we see the world, our relationships…

Is self-confidence a skill? (10 ways to learn self-confidence)

People often wonder is self-confidence a skill and how do we learn it. Are you motivated to be more confident? Or are you too scared of what others might think about you if you were to try and change that fact? Is self confidence a skill? Can we develop more self-confidence? Or is it more…

13 Amazing Things to do While Listening to Podcasts

Listening to podcasts has become one of the most popular methods for people to relax or work out. They can be used for many different purposes, including learning about new things, improving cognitive skills, and even curing boredom. Here are 13 amazing things you can do while listening to podcasts. 1. Clean the house Yes,…

10 Reasons Why Success Is the Best Revenge

Success is the best revenge has to be one of the best quotes of all time. It is so powerful because of how true it is. Whenever you feel you have been wronged in life, always remember that success is the best revenge. Here are 10 reasons why success is better than all other forms…

10 Amazing books on self-motivation

Self-motivation is something that many people struggle with, especially when they try to lose weight. Self-motivation is the key to success because it will drive you and make sure you stick with your goals. Below are 10 books on self-motivation that will have a profound impact on your life if you read them. The books…

What is the Hedgehog Concept?

The Hedgehog Concept was created by Jim Collins in “Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap… and Others Don’t” in 2001. In his book, Jim Collins argues that when organizations focus on being the best in a few specific areas, they have a better chance of success than if they try to be…

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy

• Lectures & Fellowships
• Catholic Conversations
• Reading Groups
• Liturgical Ministries
• Spirituality & Prayer
• Student Leadership
• Service & Social Justice
• Immersion Trips
• Welcome Students!
• Golden Center Hours
• Chapel Leadership
• Tour The Chapel
• Tour The Golden Center
• Magazine Archive
• Podcast Archive
• Yale Campus Map
• Sunday Mass
• Weekly Homily
• Mass Archive

STM Reflection

Doing the right thing isn't always easy.

There are many excuses for Jesus’s conduct out there. Some remind us that He has little time and a lot of world to save. The most efficient – and fair - path is to focus on those folks who have spent a few millennia getting ready for you. I must have missed the Jewish fast-pass lanes at Capernaum, but that “Jesus for Jews” reasoning doesn’t stop Him from saving the centurion’s servant or telling His disciples that “many will come from east and west and will eat with Abraham…in the kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 8.5-13). Some frame the incident as a teaching moment: we are all dogs before the throne of God and humility will save us. Very likely true, but not particularly empowering or inspiring. Others merely note that with a smorgasbord of slurs before Him, Jesus opted for the relatively mild “dog,” or more accurately, “puppy.” Well, doesn’t that make you feel warm all over?

We could stretch for other excuses, but at the end of the day that’s all they would be: excuses, and not very satisfying ones at that. Maybe, for a change, we might consider this moment through the eyes of a savior who was as much the Son of Man as the Son of God – a man constantly pestered for miracles, rejected by his neighbors, and disappointed by his best friends, looking for a little R&R by the sea when this lady shows up. Imagine you’re on vacation from the world’s most-demanding job. After driving 18 hours with a miserable 4-year-old and even more miserable 14-year-old, you unpack the car and run upstairs to change when you find a work emergency waiting on your phone. Do you jump into action? Or do you say “hey, not my problem” and pretend you’ve got no service?

Obviously, Jesus does the right thing – He always does the right thing – but that doesn’t mean it was always easy for Him. The path to Tyre and Sidon is no path to Calvary, but there might have been days when it felt like it. Difficulty, as my Amazon Prime yoga instructor likes to remind me, is subjective and changes from day to day. When it takes superhuman strength to roll out of bed or divine intervention to make a snarl a smile, it’s reassuring to think Jesus felt the same. There are more and more of those days as the virus complicates the simplest tasks, and you might feel like a champ when you manage to pick up groceries or, say, turn in a blog post 5 days late. Celebrate those victories, however small, but know you are called – and equipped – to do so much more.

Paul Meosky GRD '23

Paul Meosky is a student at Yale Law School.

In the Media

Catholic News Agency

Stained-glass window dedicated to Blessed Carlo Acutis

Ai & personhood: imitation isn't enough.

U.S. Catholic: Faith in Real Life

Exile is at the heart of the human experience: In one way or another, we are all orphans longing for home.

Upcoming lectures.

More Info Coming Fall 2024

• Email Signup
• Media Gallery
• Crisis Numbers
• There are no suggestions because the search field is empty.
• Saint Thomas More
• 268 Park Street
• New Haven, CT 06511
• 203-777-5537
• [email protected]
• Copyright © 2023.  All Rights Reserved
• Privacy Policy

Home — Essay Samples — Entertainment — Do The Right Thing — Do the Right Thing Film Analysis

Do The Right Thing Film Analysis

• Categories: Do The Right Thing Film Analysis Movie Review

About this sample

Words: 605 |

Published: Oct 2, 2020

Words: 605 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Works Cited

• Baldwin, J. (1990). James Baldwin on Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing. New York: The New York Times.
• Brown, J. (2006). Racial Stereotypes and Identity in Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing. Journal of Popular Culture, 39(2), 245-257.
• Diawara, M. (1991). Spike Lee and the Task of African American Filmmaking. Cinéaste, 18(3), 4-11.
• Evans, C. (1990). Do the Right Thing and Spike Lee's Invisible Man. African American Review, 24(4), 581-588.
• Gates Jr., H. L. (1991). Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing. The New Yorker. Retrieved from [URL]
• Jameson, F. (1993). Do the Right Thing. In Signatures of the Visible (pp. 41-68). New York: Routledge.
• Kellner, D. (1994). Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing: The Symbolic and Political Development of a Film Text. Film Quarterly, 48(2), 14-26.
• Lee, S. (2015). Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
• Mazzarella, W. (1995). How to Hear the Sound of a Brand Name: A Critique of the "McDonaldization" Thesis. American Journal of Sociology, 100(2), 325-352.
• Shome, R. (2000). The Ineffability of Race: Gender, Affect, and Silences in Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing. Camera Obscura: Feminism, Culture, and Media Studies, 15(2), 30-53.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Entertainment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2.5 pages / 1123 words

4.5 pages / 2017 words

2 pages / 925 words

3 pages / 1292 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Do The Right Thing

Directed by Spike Lee, "Do the Right Thing" is a powerful film that explores themes of racism, discrimination, and violence in urban settings. Through various film techniques, Lee addresses these issues in a thought-provoking [...]

The film "Do the Right Thing," directed by Spike Lee, is a powerful exploration of racial tensions and conflicts in a Brooklyn neighborhood. Released in 1989, the film remains relevant today, shedding light on the pervasive [...]

Does aggression help a situation improve, or only make it worse? Similar to the effect of one domino pushing down the next, acts of aggression and violence prove to only create more issues one after another. Why people choose to [...]

Spike Lee's cinematic masterpiece, "Do the Right Thing," stands as a testament to the art of filmmaking, skillfully employing its elements to convey a poignant narrative aligned with the filmmaker's intentions, vision, and the [...]

Rick, a kindhearted man with a strong moral compass, is far from the most detestable of the characters in Casablanca. While he demonstrates some qualities and actions that could lead to the assumption that he is loathsome, he is [...]

Casablanca, directed by Michael Curtiz and released in 1942, exhibits qualities of both the Classical Hollywood Narrative and Art Cinema. These two film structures are the equivalent to formalism in literature, but also point to [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Essay Writing Tips: 10 Steps to Writing a Great Essay (And Have Fun Doing It!)

by Joe Bunting | 118 comments

Do you dread essay writing? Are you looking for some essay tips that will help you write an amazing essay—and have fun doing it?

Lots of students, young and old, dread essay writing. It's a daunting assignment, one that takes research, time, and concentration.

It's also an assignment that you can break up into simple steps that make writing an essay manageable and, yes, even enjoyable.

These ten essay tips completely changed my writing process—and I hope that they can do the same for you.

Essay Writing Can Be Fun

Honestly, throughout most of high school and college, I was a mediocre essay writer.

Every once in a while, I would write a really good essay, but mostly I skated by with B's and A-minuses.

I know personally how boring writing an essay can be, and also, how hard it can be to write a good one.

However, toward the end of my time as a student, I made a breakthrough. I figured out how to not only write a great essay, I learned how to have fun while doing it . 

And since then, I've become a professional writer and have written more than a dozen books. I'm not saying that these essay writing tips are going to magically turn you into a writer, but at least they can help you enjoy the process more.

I'm excited to share these ten essay writing tips with you today! But first, we need to talk about why writing an essay is so hard.

Why Writing an Essay Is So Hard

When it comes to essay writing, a lot of students find a reason to put it off. And when they tackle it, they find it difficult to string sentences together that sound like a decent stance on the assigned subject.

Here are a few reasons why essay writing is hard:

• You'd rather be scrolling through Facebook
• You're trying to write something your teacher or professor will like
• You're trying to get an A instead of writing something that's actually good
• You want to do the least amount of work possible

The biggest reason writing an essay is so hard is because we mostly focus on those external  rewards like getting a passing grade, winning our teacher's approval, or just avoiding accusations of plagiarism.

The problem is that when you focus on external approval it not only makes writing much less fun, it also makes it significantly harder.

Because when you focus on external approval, you shut down your subconscious, and the subconscious is the source of your creativity.

The subconscious is the source of your creativity.

What this means practically is that when you're trying to write that perfect, A-plus-worthy sentence, you're turning off most of your best resources and writing skills.

So stop. Stop trying to write a good essay (or even a “good-enough” essay). Instead, write an interesting  essay, write an essay you think is fascinating. And when you're finished, go back and edit it until it's “good” according to your teacher's standards.

Yes, you need to follow the guidelines in your assignment. If your teacher tells you to write a five-paragraph essay, then write a five-paragraph essay! If your teacher asks for a specific type of essay, like an analysis, argument, or research essay, then make sure you write that type of essay!

However, within those guidelines, find room to express something that is uniquely you .

I can't guarantee you'll get a higher grade (although, you almost certainly will), but I can absolutely promise you'll have a lot more fun writing.

The Step-by-Step Process to Writing a Great Essay: Your 10 Essay Writing Tips

Ready to get writing? You can read my ten best tips for having fun while writing an essay that earns you the top grade, or check out this presentation designed by our friends at Canva Presentations .

1. Remember your essay is just a story.

Every story is about conflict and change, and the truth is that essays are about conflict and change, too! The difference is that in an essay, the conflict is between different ideas , and the change is in the way we should perceive those ideas.

That means that the best essays are about surprise: “You probably think it's one way, but in reality, you should think of it this other way.” See tip #3 for more on this.

How do you know what story you're telling? The prompt should tell you.

Any list of essay prompts includes various topics and tasks associated with them. Within those topics are characters (historical, fictional, or topical) faced with difficult choices. Your job is to work with those choices, usually by analyzing them, arguing about them, researching them, or describing them in detail.

2. Before you start writing, ask yourself, “How can I have the most fun writing this?”

It's normal to feel unmotivated when writing an academic essay. I'm a writer, and honestly, I feel unmotivated to write all the time. But I have a super-ninja, judo-mind trick I like to use to help motivate myself.

Here's the secret trick: One of the interesting things about your subconscious is that it will answer any question you ask yourself. So whenever you feel unmotivated to write your essay, ask yourself the following question:

“How much fun can I have writing this?”

Your subconscious will immediately start thinking of strategies to make the writing process more fun.

The best time to have your fun is the first draft. Since you're just brainstorming within the topic, and exploring the possible ways of approaching it, the first draft is the perfect place to get creative and even a little scandalous. Here are some wild suggestions to make your next essay a load of fun:

• Research the most surprising or outrageous fact about the topic and use it as your hook.
• Use a thesaurus to research the topic's key words. Get crazy with your vocabulary as you write, working in each key word synonym as much as possible.
• Play devil's advocate and take the opposing or immoral side of the issue. See where the discussion takes you as you write.

3. As you research, ask yourself, “What surprises me about this subject?”

The temptation, when you're writing an essay, is to write what you think your teacher or professor wants to read.

Don't do this .

Instead, ask yourself, “What do I find interesting about this subject? What surprises me?”

If you can't think of anything that surprises you, anything you find interesting, then you're not searching well enough, because history, science, and literature are all brimming   over with surprises. When you look at how great ideas actually happen, the story is always, “We used  to think the world was this way. We found out we were completely wrong, and that the world is actually quite different from what we thought.”

These pieces of surprising information often make for the best topic sentences as well. Use them to outline your essay and build your body paragraphs off of each unique fact or idea. These will function as excellent hooks for your reader as you transition from one topic to the next.

(By the way, what sources should you use for research? Check out tip #10 below.)

4. Overwhelmed? Write five original sentences.

The standard three-point essay is really made up of just five original sentences surrounded by supporting paragraphs that back up those five sentences. If you're feeling overwhelmed, just write five sentences covering your most basic main points.

Here's what they might look like for this article:

• Introductory Paragraph:  While most students consider writing an essay a boring task, with the right mindset, it can actually be an enjoyable experience.
• Body #1: Most students think writing an essay is tedious because they focus on external rewards.
• Body #2: Students should instead focus on internal fulfillment when writing an essay.
• Body #3: Not only will focusing on internal fulfillment allow students to have more fun, it will also result in better essays.
• Conclusion: Writing an essay doesn't have to be simply a way to earn a good grade. Instead, it can be a means of finding fulfillment.

After you write your five sentences, it's easy to fill in the paragraphs for each one.

Now, you give it a shot!

5. Be “source heavy.”

In college, I discovered a trick that helped me go from a B-average student to an A-student, but before I explain how it works, let me warn you. This technique is powerful , but it might not work for all teachers or professors. Use with caution.

As I was writing a paper for a literature class, I realized that the articles and books I was reading said what I was trying to say much better than I ever could. So what did I do? I quoted them liberally throughout my paper. When I wasn't quoting, I re-phrased what they said in my own words, giving proper credit, of course. I found that not only did this formula create a well-written essay, it took about half the time to write.

It's good to keep in mind that using anyone else's words, even when morphed into your own phrasing, requires citation. While the definition of plagiarism is shifting with the rise of online collaboration and cooperative learning environments, always  err on the side of excessive citation to be safe.

When I used this technique, my professors sometimes mentioned that my papers were very “source” heavy. However, at the same time, they always gave me A's.

To keep yourself safe, I recommend using a 60/40 approach with your body paragraphs: Make sure 60% of the words are your own analysis and argumentation, while 40% can be quoted (or text you paraphrase) from your sources.

Like the five sentence trick, this technique makes the writing process simpler. Instead of putting the main focus on writing well, it instead forces you to research  well, which some students find easier.

6. Write the body first, the introduction second, and the conclusion last.

Introductions are often the hardest part to write because you're trying to summarize your entire essay before you've even written it yet. Instead, try writing your introduction last, giving yourself the body of the paper to figure out the main point of your essay.

This is especially important with an essay topic you are not personally interested in. I definitely recommend this in classes you either don't excel in or care much for. Take plenty of time to draft and revise your body paragraphs before  attempting to craft a meaningful introductory paragraph.

Otherwise your opening may sound awkward, wooden, and bland.

7. Most essays answer the question, “What?” Good essays answer the “Why?” The best essays answer the “How?”

If you get stuck trying to make your argument, or you're struggling to reach the required word count, try focusing on the question, “How?”

For example:

• How did J.D. Salinger convey the theme of inauthenticity in  The Catcher In the Rye ?
• How did Napoleon restore stability in France after the French Revolution?
• How does the research prove girls really do rule and boys really do drool?

If you focus on how, you'll always have enough to write about.

8. Don't be afraid to jump around.

Essay writing can be a dance. You don't have to stay in one place and write from beginning to end.

For the same reasons listed in point #6, give yourself the freedom to write as if you're circling around your topic rather than making a single, straightforward argument. Then, when you edit and proofread, you can make sure everything lines up correctly.

In fact, now is the perfect time to mention that proofreading your essay isn't just about spelling and commas.

It's about making sure your analysis or argument flows smoothly from one idea to another. (Okay, technically this comprises editing, but most students writing a high school or college essay don't take the time to complete every step of the writing process. Let's be honest.)

So as you clean up your mechanics and sentence structure, make sure your ideas flow smoothly, logically, and naturally from one to the next as you finish proofreading.

9. Here are some words and phrases you don't want to use.

• You  (You'll notice I use a lot of you's, which is great for a blog post. However, in an academic essay, it's better to omit the second-person.)
• To Be verbs (is, are, was, were, am)

Don't have time to edit? Here's a lightning-quick editing technique .

A note about “I”: Some teachers say you shouldn't use “I” statements in your writing, but the truth is that professional, academic papers often use phrases like “I believe” and “in my opinion,” especially in their introductions.

10. It's okay to use Wikipedia, if…

Wikipedia is one of the top five websites in the world for a reason: it can be a great tool for research. However, most teachers and professors don't consider Wikipedia a valid source for use in essays.

Don't totally discount it, though! Here are two ways you can use Wikipedia in your essay writing:

• Background research. If you don't know enough about your topic, Wikipedia can be a great resource to quickly learn everything you need to know to get started.
• Find sources . Check the reference section of Wikipedia's articles on your topic. While you may not be able to cite Wikipedia itself, you can often find those original sources and cite them . You can locate the links to primary and secondary sources at the bottom of any Wikipedia page under the headings “Further Reading” and “References.”

You Can Enjoy Essay Writing

The thing I regret most about high school and college is that I treated it like something I had  to do rather than something I wanted  to do.

The truth is, education is an opportunity many people in the world don't have access to.

It's a gift, not just something that makes your life more difficult. I don't want you to make the mistake of just “getting by” through school, waiting desperately for summer breaks and, eventually, graduation.

How would your life be better if you actively enjoyed writing an essay? What would school look like if you wanted to suck it dry of all the gifts it has to give you?

All I'm saying is, don't miss out!

Looking for More Essay Writing Tips?

Looking for more essay tips to strengthen your essay writing? Try some of these resources:

• 7 Tips on Writing an Effective Essay
• Tips for Writing Your Thesis Statement

How about you? Do you have any tips for writing an essay?  Let us know in the  comments .

Need more grammar help?  My favorite tool that helps find grammar problems and even generates reports to help improve my writing is ProWritingAid . Works with Word, Scrivener, Google Docs, and web browsers. Also, be sure to use my coupon code to get 20 percent off: WritePractice20

Coupon Code:WritePractice20 »

Ready to try out these ten essay tips to make your essay assignment fun? Spend fifteen minutes using tip #4 and write five original sentences that could be turned into an essay.

When you're finished, share your five sentences in the comments section. And don't forget to give feedback to your fellow writers!

[wp_ad_camp_2]

Joe Bunting

Joe Bunting is an author and the leader of The Write Practice community. He is also the author of the new book Crowdsourcing Paris , a real life adventure story set in France. It was a #1 New Release on Amazon. Follow him on Instagram (@jhbunting).

Want best-seller coaching? Book Joe here.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Submit Comment

Join over 450,000 readers who are saying YES to practice. You’ll also get a free copy of our eBook 14 Prompts :

Popular Resources

Best Resources for Writers Book Writing Tips & Guides Creativity & Inspiration Tips Writing Prompts Grammar & Vocab Resources Best Book Writing Software ProWritingAid Review Writing Teacher Resources Publisher Rocket Review Scrivener Review Gifts for Writers

Books By Our Writers

You've got it! Just us where to send your guide.

Enter your email to get our free 10-step guide to becoming a writer.

You've got it! Just us where to send your book.

Enter your first name and email to get our free book, 14 Prompts.

Want to Get Published?

Enter your email to get our free interactive checklist to writing and publishing a book.

No USA Sales Tax . 30-Day Guarantee . Phone Orders & Help Call 866-875-4386 (toll free)

• Blog Intention
• Carol’s Bio
• EMF Protection
• Kim Press Release

Doing the Right Thing Isn’t Always Easy

I know it’s sometimes hard to do the right thing. It gets complicated by many different circumstances, such as our own self interest, fears that may be triggered and our definition of what makes something “right.”

To people who operate purely from self-interest, the right thing to do is whatever is best for them at the time (narcissists).

To people who are afraid, the right thing is whatever ends the source of their fear (living with an abuser).

To others, a right action may only be right for some people, but harmful to others (waging war).

There are probably as many different versions of what is right as there are people. And rightness can be a moving target.

To me it’s very simple; the right thing means taking responsibility for my own actions and doing what’s best for all people affected. If I cause an accident or damage another person’s property, I consider it to be my fault and I must make it right for the people who were affected. In business, if I mess up on an order or shipment, I make it right.

I make it right because it’s the fair and right thing do to.

I know how it feels to be on the other side, like when I found out someone broke one of my glasses but didn’t tell me. Or when someone I knew stole a favored Christmas ornament.

Do unto others as you would have them do onto you.

That’s the motto I strive to live by.

Unfortunately, and sadly, there are many people who do not share my beliefs about doing the right thing. For instance, my 92 year-old mom recently fell outside, in the dark pouring rain, walking across her neighbors yard to get to her mailbox, wearing flimsy, cheap backless slippers on wet grass and mud, causing her to slip (either on the wet grass, the mud or the water drainage cover) and land on her face and shoulder, but continuing to slide until she hit the Arborvitae bush. She broke a rib, her arm and nose and had a gash in her forehead that required nine stitches. And because her knees were bad, she was unable to get up and lay there in the rain, bleeding for about thirty minutes, until miraculously, a neighbor heard her cries and rescued her.

Initially, her story about what happened was to blame the cheap slippers that caused her to lose her balance and fall, and she acknowledged that the path she took to the mailbox in the rainy darkness was not a wise decision either. But as word spread about her accident, people started telling her to take pictures of the wounds and to contact a lawyer and insurance.

Her story about what happened changed, absolving her of all blame, and shifting it instead to the, “stupid neighbor” — the same neighbor that rescued her — “who planted a flower bed” in their own yard  (the shortcut to the mailbox) that she had to step over. Next she blame the company who installed the water drainage cover, then concluded with the mobile park landowner, who immediately said they would pay her $5000 once she filled out the forms.

To me, blaming those other people and wanting to profit from her carelessness — this was the sixth fall that I am aware of in the past eight years; she has always been accident prone — is not the right thing to do. Plus, it will cost her only $4 for her antibiotic prescription and nothing else because she has very good insurance coverage.

I made my feelings known, and when it was clear that we did not share the same meaning of doing the right thing, I backed off.

Then she told me not to tell anyone about the slippers or her history of accidents and falling, to protect her secret, just like she did frequently when I was a young child. She would do something behind my father’s back, then tell me what she did and tell me not to say anything to my dad.

Are you kidding? Don’t tell Dad? Of course I won’t tell Dad because if I did he would immediately confront you, and you would know it came from me, and then I would get punished by you. I learned very quickly and early on to keep my mouth shut.

Once I left home, I never allowed her to put me in that situation again, until now, nearly six decades later.

As I drove home I thought about what had transpired, and knew I would not lie for her. I do not agree with her wanting others to pay for her carelessness, but it’s not my choice to make.

So the right thing for me is to step out of it totally; she will do what she wants to do. It’s always been that way, and it is her life to live. She will be the one to pay the price of reconciling her actions.

What goes around comes around.

She is who she is, and at this late stage of her life, it’s unlikely she will change. So, once again, I am being given an opportunity to separate the behavior of the woman from the child who was never loved, and love her despite her actions.

It’s the right thing to do.

Share This:

Share this:, leave a reply cancel reply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

More From Forbes

Martin luther king jr. said, 'the time is always right to do what is right': here's how you can start.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

We would all love to change the world. For the majority of us, we have family, careers, social obligations and personal challenges that suck up our time and energy leaving little time to pursue worthwhile causes. In light of Martin Luther King Day, it would be a terrific time to think of this vision and try to employ them in our daily lives at work. There’s no pressure to fix all of the world’s problems, but if we do something positive for someone, it's a start. Yesterday, I wrote a piece in Forbes discussing the long-term success that can be achieved through Kaizen . It describes how taking small incremental steps each day can make you 1% better and eventually lead to successfully accomplishing your goals. Imagine the transformation we could collectively accomplish at work if we all took part in initiating positive changes. Here are some examples:

If you look around your office, invariably there will be several bright, young people who look lost. They look polished, sound intelligent, but somehow they are overlooked by management. Why not take that person under your wing and mentor her? It would not take much time, but would mean the world to this person to learn the ropes from a wise and experienced professional. It would make her feel honored, proud and excited about her job and future. It may be the one thing needed to head her toward a great future. If you don’t have the time or temperament for mentoring, invite the person for a cup of coffee or lunch with the goal of answering questions and concerns that she has and offer lessons you’ve learned over the years that could help her avoid costly mistakes.

A job seekers who was invited back for multiple rounds of interviews with your company, did exceptionally well each time, but was ultimately edged out by another candidate has been calling and emailing you for feedback. Yes, there are dozens of pressing matters you have to deal with and fires that you need to put out. However, after the fourth follow-up email from the candidate, how about actually picking up the phone and calling back that person? Politely share what they did well in the interview and offer some constructive feedback and the rationale as to why you went with a different person. Even though he wanted the job, the candidate will just feel elated that you called. He won’t feel as if he was just a transient number and inconsequential. The feedback could make all the difference for his next interview and possibly be the reason why he gets the next job he interviews for. You will also feel better about yourself now that a nagging weight is off of your shoulders.

Hiring managers, human resources and recruiters are inundated with résumés. More often than not, the résumés are not appropriate for the job and they clog up your inbox. What if everyday you read at least one of these résumé and cover letter submittals and contact the person? Share why they’re not a fit and volunteer an open ear to listen to what type of job they really want and provide any advice that you can offer, drawing from your own experiences. The person will feel special and appreciate you taking the time to call. It may make them rethink their strategy and try a more focused approach toward replying to job advertisements. The person may not be right for your position, but there could be other roles within your company or at other places that you could direct them to.

The interview process has become cold, clinical , driven by technology and the humanity has been wrung out of it. Job descriptions can be misleading and exclude people (such as older workers), feedback is sparingly offered and hiring managers ghost candidates that they feel are not a fit. There are innumerable petty nuisances and rudeness that job seekers are forced to endure, leaving them to feel demeaned and belittled. Put yourself in the shoes of the person seeking a new job. How would you feel if you were made to submit résumés to portals and not hear a response? Why should a well-experienced person be forced to submit lengthy applications, share their college GPA from 25 years ago, along with other personal information and then left out in the cold not knowing if the résumé was even submitted to the appropriate party?

I recognize that companies have become entranced with using technology as a magic cure-all, but consider that hiring is an interpersonal endeavor. Artificial intelligence will never supplant an honest and open conversation between people in the real world where you really get to know one another. Wouldn’t it be beneficial for everyone to remember that behind the résumés are real-life people with hopes, dreams and families who desire a fulfilling job, want to contribute and seek a chance to share their skills? Set aside the algorithms and have an actual in-person  meeting with a candidate. You’ll learn so much more than what a software program will spit out.

In the same right, when seeking a new position, have some compassion for hiring managers and recruiters. They try their best, but are besieged by hundreds of résumés for each job requisition. Hiring managers are attempting to do their job, while plugging the hole of the employee who left and also interview people. Companies don't generally train managers in the art of interviewing and they are thrown to the wind to fend for themselves. Their actions are more likely due to their unfamiliarity with the process rather than purposefully trying to be mean.

In today’s corporate world, we are overwhelmed with stress, anxiety and pressure. It's easy to become surly, comparative and abusive at times. You don’t mean to be like that. It's just that, from time to time, you reach a boiling point and explode. Moving forward, next time you have that feeling, take a deep breath and consider your actions. Instead of berating a subordinate in front of everyone, pull them aside and calmly explain what they may have done incorrectly, how to fix the error and how to avoid this in the future. The employee will appreciate your reassuring, measured approach and will rise to the occasion in the future. In turn, you will feel good about yourself by having not lost your temper and making a spectacle of yourself and hurting someone who looks up to you.

We are always fighting and jockeying for power, prestige and money. This translates into slashing 10,000 jobs or moving an entire division to other states and countries in a drive to save the company money. As the executive with this idea, you’ll get a big bonus because of the cost-saving measures. Managers casually throw perceived adversaries under the bus to get ahead. Underlings are an easy target to blame foul-ups on and steal their ideas and present them as your own. These behaviors create toxic environments, which perpetuate themselves. Since everyone else is acting in this fashion, I will too, you believe. It's a corporate jungle and it's survival, kill or be killed, you rationalize. If we all dialed it back a little, considered the ramifications of our actions, it would turn the culture around. People would work harder and results would improve, as the fear and intimidation dissipates.

It's easy to get comfortable with your clique at the office. Start reaching out to others that you don't ordinarily associate with. Put aside your hierarchical hangups. Strike up conversations with employees at all levels, races, religions, genders and economic backgrounds. Keep an open mind. If you are at a senior level, the junior employees will appreciate that you are paying attention and listening to them. You will be amazed at how much you will learn by listening to others opinions, views, ideas and perceptions.

As Martin Luther King said, “The time is always right to do what is right.” You could start right now by doing a small part to treat people with dignity, courtesy and respect.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions