I think it's a pretty vague idea. One person's 'hard' is another's sociopathy. What criterion of value do you measure 'hard' against?

I think the sentiment is an attempt at 'common sense' or what we might call folk wisdom. My mother put it differently - 'Don't be a push over.' I see no moral implications.

'What criterion of value do you measure 'hard' against?'

The legitimacy of breaking or being defeated.

This would also imply that because we might break, or be defeated, in that we would then have to experience loss in X degree, that 'hardness' is ought to a high degree.

Your words are very garbled. Sorry.

your mother said 'Don't be a push-over' - I don't see how that's any different to 'have a little hardness to you.'

I subscribe to the idea of a fallen world or society, at least. Not necessarily in the Biblical sense, though the two go hand in hand, rather a degradation of what was as far as morals, what is or should be important and desired, etc. Essentially crowned by the observation that all things that were once good and desirable are now being cast as unfavorable, and vice versa. Key example being people who are simply vitriolic and unhappy or bothered when others are unfettered by what would bother or upset them who never miss an opportunity to chastise and condemn, referring to themselves in a positive light as "blunt" or "honest" which while may be so detracts from an underlying purposelessness and unrefined level of character.

Case examples:

Positive "bluntness":
Person A: "You're going to die if you keep drinking like that."
Person B: "That was mean."
Person A: "Just being honest."

Purposeless "bluntness":
Person A: "I don't like your clothes. You look stupid."
Person B: "That was mean."
Person A: "I'm a blunt person. Get on my level."

Etcetera...

Social floors or depths are often now painted as ceilings or "bare minimums" to aspire toward instead of the undesirable states of being to be avoided they always were by those who are confined to them.

Still, others offer a valid point. Any adult who cries over spilled milk or the slightest criticism for example is likely doomed to bring preventable hardship, struggle, and even mortal danger to themselves as well as those close to them. School of hard knocks I guess.

"If you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes into you." - Nietzsche

It's a fine line to walk. Easiest thing in the world to bring someone down, a literal dried piece of excrement on a sidewalk can do that. But to lift someone up, make a person smile, and give purpose to the self-proclaimed purposeless? That is what takes ability most either do not possess or find too difficult to achieve and live by, what separates a true leader from his or her peers.

Don't be a push-over' - I don't see how that's any different to 'have a little hardness to you.' — Barkon

I already said this.

I don't understand your other response. But perhaps we should leave it.

this is completely agreeable, thanks for your wise insight.

I personally prefer the opposite (not necessarily as a moral position, but as a functional position--if the two are mutually exclusive, which, I think not).

I prefer malleable, like the Taoist "suggestion" to be as an "uncarved block".

Easiest thing in the world to bring someone down, a literal dried piece of excrement on a sidewalk can do that. — Outlander

Yet, when asked what is Buddha Nature, the Master Yun Men answered, " a shit stick." Presumably used as TP.

If our condition is not static but perpetually becoming. There's no point in being a hard dried-up turd blocking your own bowels from discharging their duty, movement. Move along. Exercise discrimination where needed such that you are satisfied that you have discerned the most functional place to temporarily settle. But move, keep moving.

I subscribe to the idea of a fallen world or society, at least. Not necessarily in the Biblical sense, — Outlander

I think I do too. In fact the Eden Myth offers itself up as a brilliant allegory (in my opinion, as brilliant as the Cave). It is because we have fallen from being (Tree of Life) and chosen becoming (tree of knowledge (of difference, i.e. "good and evil")) that we cannot be Hard, even if we think we can. We are like that piece of plastic in the film, American Beauty; and like the answers in Bob Dylan's early "hit", blowing in the wind.

Is it a moral thing to be hard?

If you have consent, I guess it is.

For some of us, Lionino, I guess it isn't.

understood, but isn't this just reaching the same conclusion, aren't you being malleable to be hard? Just wondering. It seems that you hypothetically want to perform greater than others in such a way it would reflect as 'hardness', or as I put, difficulty/tolerant - it seems so but in the face of the world, more.

isn't this just reaching the same conclusion, aren't you being malleable to be hard? — Barkon

Hmm. Intuition tells me to look into that further, but on the face of it, I'd say no. I'm, maybe being "hard" regarding malleabiliy. But that's not what you mean, right?

seems that you hypothetically want to perform greater than others in such a way it would reflect as 'hardness', — Barkon

Not sure I understand. My interest in malleablity is not per se driven by any moral drive. Rather, I'm suggesting--under the influence of Zhuangzi--that the obstacles to free and easy functioning "in the face of this world," and the resulting suffering, comes from hardness.

your mother said 'Don't be a push-over' - I don't see how that's any different to 'have a little hardness to you.' — Barkon

By hardness, do you mean Firmness? Resolve? Constitution? Principle? I certainly think the last three are all admirable qualities, but before you go any further, let's figure out what "hardness" means.

Yes I do mean that and more. Hard is a broad category.