Quote Originally Posted by Viridian View Post
I've been thinking about this lately...

When someone is described as a "decent" human being, it seems to imply that the person in question is barely passable when it comes to basic morality, or, at the very least, average in matters of virtue.

However, being described as "good" seems to place one a little above average in the "morality scale", from "being a nice guy" to "being a heroic figure".

So, in your opinion, where does the line between these two lie, approximately? What makes someone "good" or "decent"?

And where do you draw the line between "decent" and "crummy"? Is an isolated event enough for you to brand someone as "less than decent"?
Hey V, I just thought I would let you know that you pose your questions very well. That is all.