Political Crossfire Forums

[Jufarius87]

I am hard pressed to find any action outside the sphere of divine intervention which is not ultimately based on the cost-benefit principle of economics and therefore, ultimately on ones one well being

even acts that could be seen as selfless, such as sacraficing ones own life either for a religion or another person are subject to cost benefit analysis

example: going to a willing death for one's own religion
cost: one's physical life (about 20-60 more yrs of physical existence)
benefit (perceived or real): eternal life, and possibly if you are muslim, virgin women

ultimately religous "sacrafice" then has one's own self in mind

example: charity
cost: whatever physical item you sacrafice (money food etc.)
benefit: the "good feeling" you get from giving, the feeling you helped society, a possible feeling of superiority to whoever you just gave to

the proof of this being you never see anyone give substantially and then be in a bad mood about it, it makes people feel good, its another self centered trade off

example: giving your life for another's
cost: your physical existence
benefit: again, for many people eternal rewards, possible earthly glory as a hero and most importantly the life of the other person, when we give our lives for someone else its usually someone else that we love or care about deeply, to lose that person and for us to still be alive would haunt us and play with our emotional stability so ultimately its still a self centered action

[Snarf]

Why exempt divine intervention? Don't you think God gets a kick?

[The Anarchist]

Seems everything everyone does it because they want something. Even if they do good, it's because of the good feeling they get. I think every action is selfish, but that doesn't make it bad.

[Jufarius87]

Snarf wrote: Why exempt divine intervention? Don't you think God gets a kick?

hypotheticly if you believe in certain religions there are a couple that imo break the idea of celf centered thinking, example: jesus died for our sins, but when he did that he died for everyone as whole.... including the people who hated him and crusified him....

[thebreadloaf2003]

Well if you think about the situation in accordance to modern day society, man's main goal in the modern world is to excel, whether it be materialistic or phsycological (phsycological being emotion or knowledge).

and from what I have learned in history, people from hundreds or thousands of years ago had the main ambition to survive, and to survive there has to be some selfish portion of each action, for survival of ones self is self preservation for life wich requires one to be at least somewhat selfish.

so essentialy i would have to conclude that, outside any religious ideas of devine intervention or anything related in the aspect of a higher power intervening to change an outcome, there is no such thing as a truely selfless act.

personaly i think it is due to human instinct of ones own benifits, but everyone has a different thoughton why.

[Zoot]

This is tautologous.

Choices are made for reasons.

Reasons are evaluations of actions and their predictable consequences.

The action that has the most preferable predictable consequences in terms of the criteria held by the agent is the one committed.



The only reason "selfless" and "altruistic" exist as terms in our language is because we arbitrarily divide reasons for acting up into "selfish" and "selfless". If I give $100 to a poor person, someone might call that selfless. But if I chose to do it, then I had my reasons, and those reasons can be expressed as what I wanted to do. Perhaps I wanted to impress the girl I was with. Perhaps I wanted the poor guy to be a bit happier. Perhaps I wanted to do what I thought is the right thing to do. Etc.

[George W Bush]

its selfish to help the needy because it gives some of us such a rush. thats true, you know.
for others, its about flaunting your excess. thats evident when businesses gloat about being 'proud sponsers of the <name charity here>".
selflessness sells

[Gus]

Of course they are--a mind that does not choose what it thinks is the best course of action for itself is not even conceivable.

[Hyrum]

I think that this selfish concept is a western idea.
I had to read the book "No Contest" in college for one of my sociology classes.
I talks about how American (and western) society is totaly based on competition. Everything from work to school to sports and family games are all focused on competition. for you to succeed someone else has to fail.
Competition is inherently selfish.
However, I don't think that every person that helps or volunteers does it to makes themselves feel good. Maybe some people do it because they are genuinely nice people and they do good purely for the sake of doing good.
I think it is a very morbid world if everyone is only looking out for themselves.

[George W Bush]

Hyrum wrote: I think that this selfish concept is a western idea.
I had to read the book "No Contest" in college for one of my sociology classes.
I talks about how American (and western) society is totaly based on competition. Everything from work to school to sports and family games are all focused on competition. for you to succeed someone else has to fail.
Competition is inherently selfish.
However, I don't think that every person that helps or volunteers does it to makes themselves feel good. Maybe some people do it because they are genuinely nice people and they do good purely for the sake of doing good.
I think it is a very morbid world if everyone is only looking out for themselves.

True. The point is that SOMETHING is derived from charity. This is clear when you cited that some support charity because they are genuinely nice. Theres a need to represent character here (of being nice).
Thats true.
Then, for the 'sake of doing good' is also based on the selfish concept when you consider their ideal to 'do good'.

I think the point is that selfishness is not exactly negative all the time.
This is a consequence, in my opinion, of human condition: that we have no motivation to do something if its not beneficial/detrimented in some way. I'm saying we can never 'just do things' - were not robots, we have feelings. We go to sleep because were tired, we eat because were hungry, we give to people because we dont want to see them starve or be harmed (thats evident of 'good' selfishness, imo).
this is a fascinating topic.

[thefranzkafkafront]

The invisible hand, by your own selfish courses of actions you inadvertantly help others in their courses of action.

Its been the guiding principle be hind western free market economics (you know the one that works) for the past 300 odd years.

[Kali Maxwell]

Yes, all actions are inherently selfish.

If a person did not have some sort of motive, they wouldn't have done it. Something must be gained from it in order for it to be worthwhile.

Even looking yourself in the face in the mirror and being able to say, "I did a good thing for somebody today; I'm a better person because of it" is a benefit.

[Korimyr the Rat]

Kali Maxwell wrote: Even looking yourself in the face in the mirror and being able to say, "I did a good thing for somebody today; I'm a better person because of it" is a benefit.

The important question then becomes: What implications does this have for morality and moral behavior?

If every action have a motive, then we can no longer use "selflessness" as the basis of morality; we cannot measure "moral behavior" by how much it costs us and how much it helps others.

[The Good Doctor]

The reason you can't find any behavior outside of the economics definition of selfishness is because the definition of human actions preclude selfish human action already.

It would be like going to the local pound to find out if there is such a thing as a 4-legged animal that's not a cat or dog.

[$orideals]

Giving your life in place of another's without an expectation of afterlife is an example of a selfless human action.

[Zoot]

Quote: Giving your life in place of another's without an expectation of afterlife is an example of a selfless human action.

If it's a decision, then the person who made the decision can hypothetically be asked, "Why did you do that?"

The answer to that question will be something that person wants, in some way or other.

[The Good Doctor]

Zoot wrote: Quote: Giving your life in place of another's without an expectation of afterlife is an example of a selfless human action.

If it's a decision, then the person who made the decision can hypothetically be asked, "Why did you do that?"

The answer to that question will be something that person wants, in some way or other.

I don't know, that's as selfless a thing as I can imagine. Even considering that Mother Theresa did good deeds for the positive happiness points in her mind, how many positive happy points can someone expect to get in the few seconds or minutes they'll live between the decision and the actual sacrifice?

[George W Bush]

The Good Doctor wrote: Zoot wrote: Quote: Giving your life in place of another's without an expectation of afterlife is an example of a selfless human action.

If it's a decision, then the person who made the decision can hypothetically be asked, "Why did you do that?"

The answer to that question will be something that person wants, in some way or other.

I don't know, that's as selfless a thing as I can imagine. Even considering that Mother Theresa did good deeds for the positive happiness points in her mind, how many positive happy points can someone expect to get in the few seconds or minutes they'll live between the decision and the actual sacrifice?

selfish in context. Either positive or negative, depending on what side your on:
she did good deeds because she didnt want to see the effects of her not having done good deed. thats the reason (selfishness) behind her action.
good selfishness.

[Korimyr the Rat]

$orideals wrote: Giving your life in place of another's without an expectation of afterlife is an example of a selfless human action.

Maybe they're just sparing themselves the pain of surviving and knowing themselves to be a coward-- having to see that person's face everytime they try to go to sleep.

That's not a pain I would bear lightly.

[The Good Doctor]

George W Bush wrote: The Good Doctor wrote: Zoot wrote: Quote: Giving your life in place of another's without an expectation of afterlife is an example of a selfless human action.

If it's a decision, then the person who made the decision can hypothetically be asked, "Why did you do that?"

The answer to that question will be something that person wants, in some way or other.

I don't know, that's as selfless a thing as I can imagine. Even considering that Mother Theresa did good deeds for the positive happiness points in her mind, how many positive happy points can someone expect to get in the few seconds or minutes they'll live between the decision and the actual sacrifice?

selfish in context. Either positive or negative, depending on what side your on:
she did good deeds because she didnt want to see the effects of her not having done good deed. thats the reason (selfishness) behind her action.
good selfishness.

No, I mean what about the person who sacrifices himself for someone else? Like Sidney Carton subbing for Charles Darnay in A Tales of Two Cities. You don't really get to enjoy the sense of self-satisfaction very long.

On the other hand, he sure sounded full of self-satisfaction in the closing lines:

"It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known."

So yeah, that seems pretty selfish.