William Hazlitt’s statement invites us to reconsider the conventional ideals of virtue and kindness associated with 'goodness.' At first glance, society tends to praise natural kindness and compassion as innate virtues that signify moral superiority. However, Hazlitt provocatively suggests that what is often perceived as genuine goodness may, in reality, be rooted in selfishness or indolence. From an analytical standpoint, this perspective resonates with psychological and philosophical debates about the nature of altruism. Sometimes, individuals act kindly not solely out of concern for others, but because such behavior aligns comfortably with their own ease of conscience or self-interest. For instance, a person who demonstrates considerable charity or benevolence might do so because it enhances their reputation or provides personal satisfaction, rather than purely for altruistic reasons. This view complicates the moral landscape, prompting us to question the purity of virtue and whether true selflessness is achievable or even desirable. It also challenges us to examine our motivations for kindness and virtue—are they driven by societal expectations, internal contentment, or genuine concern? Hazlitt’s critique also hints at a deeper existential idea: that human behavior is often motivated, consciously or unconsciously, by a desire for comfort, ease, or self-preservation. Recognizing this may lead us to cultivate more authentic virtues or accept the complexity of human motives. In essence, the quote encourages introspection on the true nature of virtue and the often nuanced selfishness underlying our best qualities.