Is it fairly obvious (and very widely ,if tacitly accepted) that this is an impossible thing to achieve?

All we can do is to hope we have an either innate or learned appeciation of what "good" might be so that we could even be the judge of what might be "the good" in others ?

Absolute "good" ,...is that a misnomer and are we ,(if we are ) just striving for degrees of better imperfection?

If we are (so striving),how can we promote that "struggle" in the outside world and can we be at all sure that more good than harm is actually being achieved ?

Edit:

Is ,perhaps the wish to be or do "good" an integral part of our DNA after this long period of evolution and might the sensible aim be for micro adjustments on the tiller of human progress ,albeit in presently tempestuous and rocky waters?

2 hours ago, geordief said:

Is it fairly obvious (and very widely ,if tacitly accepted) that this is an impossible thing to achieve?

All we can do is to hope we have an either innate or learned appeciation of what "good" might be so that we could even be the judge of what might be "the good" in others ?

Absolute "good" ,...is that a misnomer and are we ,(if we are ) just striving for degrees of better imperfection?

If we are (so striving),how can we promote that "struggle" in the outside world and can we be at all sure that more good than harm is actually being achieved ?

Edit:

Is ,perhaps the wish to be or do "good" an integral part of our DNA after this long period of evolution and might the sensible aim be for micro adjustments on the tiller of human progress ,albeit in presently tempestuous and rocky waters?

Well of course one can persuade people to do good. Appeals to our better nature are commonplace, surely?

Compulsion is a different matter.

8 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Well of course one can persuade people to do good. Appeals to our better nature are commonplace, surely?

Compulsion is a different matter.

So ,open minded communication.(but "better nature" is subjective and a manipulator may first need to manipulate themselves to be effective)

Compulsion is ,though woven into the fabic of all our dealings with each other (laws being an example,customs another)

Perhaps the difficulty is when we don't take "no" for an answer-we have to fail in order to make meaningful progress.

26 minutes ago, geordief said:

So ,open minded communication.(but "better nature" is subjective and a manipulator may first need to manipulate themselves to be effective)

Compulsion is ,though woven into the fabic of all our dealings with each other (laws being an example,customs another)

Perhaps the difficulty is when we don't take "no" for an answer-we have to fail in order to make meaningful progress.

I'm not sure I follow your last statement. Doing or being good is generally some form of altruistic behaviour, directed towards the benefit of someone or something other than oneself. To take a trivial example, something as simple as responding to a charity appeal is doing good as a result of persuasion.

By contrast, doing something for the good of others because one is forced to rather deprives the act of moral virtue. I pay my taxes each year because if I don't I can get sent to prison, not because I have chosen to donate part of my income to the National Health Service or the education system or the armed forces. I happen not to begrudge the tax demand, because firstly I can afford it and secondly I recognise the value, to me and society, of the services the State provides us all. (I have had trouble explaining to earnest tax advisers that I have no interest in their special schemes to reduce my tax liabilities. To them it is inconceivable that somebody might pay tax willingly. But that's another story.) But I can't claim any moral virtue in paying my taxes, or in stopping at a zebra crossing to let somebody cross the road. It's the law.

What do you mean by failing in order to make progress? Failing in what way? And what form of progress?

18 minutes ago, exchemist said:

I'm not sure I follow your last statement. Doing or being good is generally some form of altruistic behaviour, directed towards the benefit of someone or something other than oneself. To take a trivial example, something as simple as responding to a charity appeal is doing good as a result of persuasion.

By contrast, doing something for the good of others because one is forced to rather deprives the act of moral virtue. I pay my taxes each year because if I don't I can get sent to prison, not because I have chosen to donate part of my income to the National Health Service or the education system or the armed forces. I happen not to begrudge the tax demand, because firstly I can afford it and secondly I recognise the value, to me and society, of the services the State provides us all. (I have had trouble explaining to earnest tax advisers that I have no interest in their special schemes to reduce my tax liabilities. To them it is inconceivable that somebody might pay tax willingly. But that's another story.) But I can't claim any moral virtue in paying my taxes, or in stopping at a zebra crossing to let somebody cross the road. It's the law.

What do you mean by failing in order to make progress? Failing in what way? And what form of progress?

Is altruism a form of coercion(not by the object of the altruistic action but by the attendant circumstances)

If there was not an evolved societal order would not the order of the day be to take as much as one needed and then to take note of the behaviour of others who were either haggling/ fighting for leftovers or moving on to another activity ,their desires sated?

Altruism =enlightened self interest?

,By "failing so as to progress meaningfully" I had in mind failing to convince someone of your own belief and learning from that failure.

Edit:I appreciate that an altruistic act gives physical pleasure to the giver/actor(is that also a form of biological coercion?)

10 minutes ago, geordief said:

Is altruism a form of coercion(not by the object of the altruistic action but by the attendant circumstances)

If there was not an evolved societal order would not the order of the day be to take as much as one needed and then to take note of the behaviour of others who were either haggling/ fighting for leftovers or moving on to another activity ,their desires sated?

Altruism =enlightened self interest?

,By "failing so as to progress meaningfully" I had in mind failing to convince someone of your own belief and learning from that failure.

Edit:I appreciate that an altruistic act gives physical pleasure to the giver/actor(is that also a form of biological coercion?)

No. There is this thing called love. Love leads people to act for the benefit of family, friends, partners and even members of the a wider community, without self-interest. (Unless you count as self-interest the feeling of wellbeing and satisfaction one gets from having done something altruistic. But in my opinion that way leads to disappearing up one's own arsehole.)

I remember being struck, during the Covid lockdown, by the enormous reservoir of goodwill that was released. Perfect strangers or neighbours one had never spoken to were suddenly willing to run errands and so on for other people. It was as if they were just aching to be given permission, socially speaking, to talk to one another and help out. This too is a form of love in its broadest sense.

I'm not sure where failing to convince someone of your own belief comes into all this. Why would a person's beliefs be relevant? Can you give an example?

13 minutes ago, exchemist said:

No. There is this thing called love. Love leads people to act for the benefit of family, friends, partners and even members of the a wider community, without self-interest. (Unless you count as self-interest the feeling of wellbeing and satisfaction one gets from having done something altruistic. But in my opinion that way leads to disappearing up one's own arsehole.)

I remember being struck, during the Covid lockdown, by the enormous reservoir of goodwill that was released. Perfect strangers or neighbours one had never spoken to were suddenly willing to run errands and so on for other people. It was as if they were just aching to be given permission, socially speaking, to talk to one another and help out. This too is a form of love in its broadest sense.

I'm not sure where failing to convince someone of your own belief comes into all this. Why would a person's beliefs be relevant? Can you give an example?

Well,just on this site we get posters with the most incredible ideas that ,if one wanted to be charitable one could devote an enormous amount of time trying to persuade them of the apparent (often blatant) error of their beliefs.

Of course that is likely to be a complete waste of time as people's beliefs can be almost impossible to change (unless,perhaps you can persuade them that it was their idea in the first place)

In everyday life the same can apply where ,with some people there really is hardly any point in disagreeing with someone as they "already know best".

Edited 16 hours ago16 hr by geordief

1 hour ago, geordief said:

Well,just on this site we get posters with the most incredible ideas that ,if one wanted to be charitable one could devote an enormous amount of time trying to persuade them of the apparent (often blatant) error of their beliefs.

Of course that is likely to be a complete waste of time as people's beliefs can be almost impossible to change (unless,perhaps you can persuade them that it was their idea in the first place)

In everyday life the same can apply where ,with some people there really is hardly any point in disagreeing with someone as they "already know best".

True, but what does that have to do with persuading or compelling people to do good?

10 minutes ago, exchemist said:

True, but what does that have to do with persuading or compelling people to do good?

Well,in our mind's eye we may make the erroneous (but perhaps logically necessary) assumption that we are right and we do good.

So ,if we cannot persuade another of the correctness of our position then it seems to us that we have failed to compell or persuade that person to be or do good.

Just because I accepted /posited in the OP that it was not possible to persuade or compel others to "do good" does not mean that I might not still harbour that (futile?) ambition-and that it might not resurface if circumstances changed and it seemed possible or desirable.

10 hours ago, geordief said:

Absolute "good" ,...is that a misnomer and are we ,(if we are ) just striving for degrees of better imperfection?

There are things some people consider good and that others do not.

Some people can be persuaded by the carrot, some compelled by the stick and some do not care. Some will be contrary just for the sake of being contrary and some owing to other motivations.