If a person wants to live in a good world, he should ACTIVELY do things to make the world better.

Ah, some great arguments. Unfortunately, I fear we are getting off-topic. My own fault, I believe, for leading us in this direction. Let me quote the question for us: "If a person wants to live in a good world, he should ACTIVELY do things to make the world better." In my opinion, this implies that anyone who does not do this is not deserving of a kind, just world to call home. I 100% agree that, if everyone did not "actively do things to make the world better," the world would indeed be completely apathetic, without an ounce of kindness to be shown. However, it is my point of view that it is highly unlikely that an entire community would act like this. Along with what you've quoted, I also said this:"Of course, it's better to be one of the people who values justice and equality; I would have to be insane to argue against that. But how can we convict the people who don't? If we believe they don't deserve to live in a good world, then, in a way, we don't either." I apologize if I failed to articulate on this enough. What I mean by this is that, despite there being nice people and people that are--um--not quite so friendly, I think that they are all shades of grey. You've probably heard this before, but it's my opinion that no one is black or white; there are people with higher moral values than others, but no one is completely selfless or completely not (I personally believe this expression could use some revising, considering the slang terms commonly used for some groups of people, but this is not the place for me to rant about that). No matter how dark a shade of grey someone is, everyone deserves to live in a fair world.Another thing I'd like to discuss is the difference between apathy and blatant violence. You've already quoted me there. Let me now be more specific:Juan_Pablo said:"Why retaliate against somone in your neighborhood physically when they genuinely want to be your friend and help you in your time of need?"Also:"Things like public anger and outbursts, individual withdrawal (from a community), outright greed and unfriendliness increases mistrusts, combativeness, crime, and violence - and this effects the mood of a community, nation in negative way."I do not believe you have to be someone who would physically hurt another to be someone that does not try to improve the world. Although it's much better to smile when crossing someone on the street--though I do not know if we should include this as "actively doing things to make the world better," I suppose it's up to us--not everyone is going to. Every small body movement--even in us, a species who communicates primarily by vocal means--encourages a mood, and points the receiver of the gesture towards a certain stance; even such a small gesture as smiling when you see someone can have an effect on their feelings, at least those directed at you. Unfortunately, not everyone is going to think about that when they cross someone on the street. Among other reasons, they might not realise what a huge impact it has on their reaction. After all, things like this work at a subconscious level. Someone simply rushing by, frowning, has a world of difference between it and walking up to the person and punching them. It would have to be a very miserable community for that to happen; unbelievably so, and this, I would think, is not accomplishable by a single or a few people simply withdrawing from a community.As stated, although greed is a common cause for not being charitable, it is not something we want to completely eliminate. Humans run, partially, on greed. What makes us human is a combination of emotions, and it is my view that we can't expect these emotions to be in perfect and balanced harmony in everyone.Although I wouldn't say that apathy is harmless, I don't think that it's without it's benefits that some people be apathetic; same with greed, hostility, and all other internal, negative emotions. Nor is it possible, from my perspective, to completely eliminate apathy and pain. As you said, there are certain unpleasant aspects of our society that we cannot rid ourselves of. One point is that, without these emotions, the less-hostile opposing ones within us are vastly less likely to be appreciated. Also, these things--hostile emotions--help to make us whole. Can any of us honestly claim, without lying, that we care about others that we don't know just as much as we care about ourselves and our family? It would take an amazing person. I know I'm not that person. This may seem off-topic, so let me reiterate: We all have apethy, and all the other emotions mentioned in this debate. It is simply a question of whether people have more of those emotions than they'd like to have. It's not a question of two catagories, where one is good and the other bad, and whether the bad one should be allowed to reside in a hypathetically good world.