Those Others

[Adrien Cornes]

If you have COVID-19, you can spread the virus to others. There are precautions you can take to prevent spreading it to others: isolation, masking, and avoiding contact with people who are at high risk of getting very sick. Isolation is used to separate people with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 from those without COVID-19.\n\nFollow isolation and precaution recommendations if you have or suspect you have COVID-19. These steps help prevent spreading the virus to others in your household and your community. Take precautions regardless of your vaccination status.\n\nThose Others\nDownload Zip https://t.co/HHSS7MuLt4\n\n\n\nGet tested if you have COVID-19 symptoms. A viral test tells you if you are infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. There are two types of viral tests: rapid tests and laboratory tests. These tests might use samples from your nose or throat, or saliva. Knowing if you are infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 allows you to take care of yourself and take actions to reduce the chance that you will infect others.\n\nAvoiding contact with people who have COVID-19, whether or not they feel sick, can reduce your risk of catching the virus from them. If possible, avoid being around a person who has COVID-19 until they can safely end home isolation. Sometimes it may not be practical for you to stay away from a person who has COVID-19 or you may want to help take care of them. In those situations, use as many prevention strategies as you can, such as practicing hand hygiene, consistently and correctly wearing a high-quality mask, improving ventilation, and keeping your distance, when possible, from the person who is sick or who tested positive.\n\nRespirators (for example, N95) are made to protect you by fitting closely on the face to filter out particles, including the virus that causes COVID-19. They can also block droplets and particles you breathe, cough, or sneeze out so you do not spread them to others. Respirators (for example, N95) provide higher protection than masks.\n\nSmall particles that people breathe out can contain virus particles. The closer you are to a greater number of people, the more likely you are to be exposed to the virus that causes COVID-19. To avoid this possible exposure, you may want to avoid crowded areas, or keep distance between yourself and others. These actions also protect people who are at high risk for getting very sick from COVID-19 in settings where there are multiple risks for exposure.\n\nIf you need to represent someone through the application process, visit our Representing Social Security Claimants page. For advocates or third-party organizations assisting others, please visit our Appointed Representative Services page.\n\nSocial Security is committed to providing service to everyone, especially people who can experience barriers to our benefits and services. Visit our pages for more information on someone assisting Veterans, someone experiencing homelessness, someone applying for benefits prior to release from Prison, or someone helping those reinstating benefits after release from Prison.\n\nSo, several years ago, I made a goal to stop comparing myself to others. And let me tell you: It hasn't been easy. With 24/7 access to view the best parts of everyone else's lives right on my phone, I know exactly how I measure up against every other mom, wife and speaker with a social media account.\n\n\n\nContrary to what most people think, communication style is not exclusively determined by personality. It is also affected by the choices we have learned to make by watching others, trial and error attempts, parental influence and a variety of life experiences. Communication style is a choice. For example, we choose words, how loudly we speak, timing of the conversation and the strategies we use to influence others. These choices affect whether or not people hear our point or are distracted by our behavior. When we make the wrong communication choices, people have two thoughts:\n\nHe has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.\n\nHe has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.\n\nHe has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.\n\nAltruistic acts include not only those undertaken in order to do goodto others, but also those undertaken in order to avoid or prevent harmto them. Suppose, for example, someone drives her car extra cautiouslybecause she sees that she is in an area where children are playing, andshe wants to insure that she injures no one. It would be appropriate tosay that her caution is altruistically motivated. She is not trying tomake those children better off, but she is being careful not to makethem worse off. She does this because she genuinely cares about them fortheir sake.\n\nAs noted above, altruistic acts are guided by assumptions made by theagent about the well-being of some other individual or group. Whatwell-being consists in is a disputed matter, but it is uncontroversialthat a distinction must be drawn between (i) what constituteswell-being and (ii) what is a necessary means towards or apre-condition of well-being. This kind of distinction is familiar, andis applicable in all sorts of cases. For example, we distinguishbetween what a breakfast consists in (cereal, juice, coffee) and thethings one needs in order to eat breakfast (spoons, glasses, mugs).There is no such thing as eating breakfast but not eating anythingthat breakfast consists in. In the same way, well-being must be soughtand fostered by seeking and fostering the good or goods in whichwell-being consists. Rival theories of well-being are competing waysof answering the question: what are its constituents? After we haveanswered that question, we need to address the further question of howbest to obtain those constituents. (Contemporary discussions ofwell-being can be found in Badhwar 2014; Feldman 1994, 2010; Fletcher2016; Griffin 1986; Kraut 2007; Sumner 1996 Tiberius 2018.)\n\nPerhaps the people you know are like this. But my experienceof the world is rather different from yours. I know many people whotry to benefit others for their sake. I myself act altruistically. So,at most, your theory applies only to the people in your socialworld.\n\nTo take matters to an extreme, it might be suggested that our ultimatemotivation is always entirely other-regarding. According to thisfar-fetched hypothesis, whenever we act for our own good, we do so notat all for our own sake, but always entirely for the sake of someoneelse. The important point here is that the denial that altruism existsshould be regarded with as much suspicion as this contrary denial,according to which people never act ultimately for their own good.Both are dubious universal generalizations. Both have farless plausibility than the common sense assumption that peoplesometimes act in purely egoistic ways, sometimes in purely altruisticways, and often in ways that mix, in varying degrees, the good ofoneself and the good of others.\n\nThe consequentialist has a more radical interpretation of whatimpartiality means and requires. His ideal of impartiality does notallow the lifeguard to take into consideration the fact that byswimming north he will be able to save his friend. After all,the well-being of his friend is not made more valuable simplybecause that person is his friend. Just as my good is notmade more valuable than the good of others simply because it ismy good, so too the well-being of my friend deserves no extraweight because he is a friend of mine. So, the lifeguard,according to the consequentialist, must choose to save one grouprather than the other solely on the basis of the greater balance ofgood over bad.\n\nIf we adopt a weaker interpretation of impartiality, we see thejustification of altruism simply by seeing that we have a duty to aidother people in certain circumstances. The moral rule that requires usto help others is a rule that calls upon us to help them not as ameans to our own good, but simply in virtue of their need. And we seethe rule as justified by recognizing that it strikes a proper balancebetween our self-concern and the appropriate claims of others.\n\nwhen we take up the objective standpoint, the problem is not thatvalues seem to disappear but that there are too many of them, comingfrom every life and drowning out those that arise from our own. (1986:147)\n\nwhat is most important in human relationships cannot be captured by anapproach that begins with a general rule about how to treat others,and justifies a certain way of treating each particular individualsimply by applying that general rule.\n\nThe same point applies to questions about everyday rules that governsuch acts as promise-keeping, lying, theft, and other kinds of suspectbehavior. Here too we rightly expect each other to have a generalpolicy, one that takes these sorts of actions to be wrong in normalcircumstances. That a promise has been freely made is normally adecisive reason for keeping it; someone who keeps a promise only if hehas a positive feeling about doing so would not be treating others asthey rightly expect to be treated. (For opposing views, see Dancy2004; Ridge and McKeever 2006.)\n\nWhat is wrong with those who do not care about others for their sake?It could be the case that such individuals are themselves worse offfor their lack of altruistic motivation. That is what a eudaimonistmust say, and we have not objected to that aspect of eudaimonism. Itcould also be the case that there is a failure of rationality amongthose who are never altruistic or insufficiently altruistic. But itshould not be assumed that there must be something else that goes awryin those who are not altruistic or not altruistic enough, beyond thefact that when they ought to have cared about some individual otherthan themselves, they failed to do so.\n eebf2c3492\n