- Joined
- Jul 8, 2006
- Messages
- 2,658
- Reaction score
- 8
What?! Making fun of my polysyllaby?
1) Hypocritical because there are always ulterior motives. That is not necessarily bad. Even the most religious/spiritual good-doer in the world has a superior motive for doing what they do. They believe in a higher power, in heavenly rewards, in the after-life, etc. So, they might give themselves away, but always in the name of something.
What?! Making fun of my polysyllaby?
what if the person's a humanist or atheist?
I know you pretty well...although I guess I shouldn't reveal that, lest you decide to start drawing your curtains in the evenings.seriously. . .
jochi, i think you and i would be good friends if we actually knew each other.
(*any* degree of pleasure derived from the pleasure of others becomes self-serving, even things like a sense of accomplishment).
Then they just get personal satisfaction from it. It makes them feel good about the world, about themselves, about the other person, etc. What I'm trying to explain is that nobody is completely detached from their actions.
that's when you do good things in order to have a sense of accomplishment (the sense of accomplishment is the goal)
but what if the goal is for the being (because it can be an animal) of need not suffering anymore/being helped?
OK, but how is that "selfish"?
because I don't think people are walking around, purposely trying to help others for their own benefit, even if they feel satisfied afterwards (which they should)
being selfish is being chiefly or only concerned with yourself
Again, there is still some sense of "I've done the right thing" when you alleviate that suffering. Bear in mind, I'm not condemning actions, and I'm explicitly making a difference between egoism and narcissism. The only time I've come across a genuinely/purely altruistic act was in hypothetical Kantian ethics (the disinterested philanthropist case), but Kantian moral agents don't really exist.
I think this is where your misunderstanding started. None of us have ever taken to say that actions are PURELY SELFISH. We have stated that all actions include selfish motives, which is not the same thing. Read the first post by Quix, he explains it well there.
so there's no such thing as a purely unselfish motive?
Then where do self-harming actions, such as cutting yourself, or, if we go all the way, suicide fall into this? Are we just saying that they are self-beneficial because we feel the urge to commit those actions?The issue is self-interest, which is different from selfishness. The former does not necessarily have the same negative connotation as the latter. The issue of psychological egoism isn't a question of selfishness, it's that every action we perform, in either the short or long term, is self-beneficial.
Then where do self-harming actions, such as cutting yourself, or, if we go all the way, suicide fall into this? Are we just saying that they are self-beneficial because we feel the urge to commit those actions?
I find it hard to define self-interest here. For example, we have someone who is a bulimic trying to stop or someone who's realized he's got a drinking problem and needs to get it under control. Both are harming themselves with their actions if they continue on that path, thus clearly not acting in their self-interest (and they both realize they are hurting themselves), and yet they arguably have some self-interest vested in their destructive behaviours (booze and food makes them feel good, in a nutshell). How do such deviations from the norm fit into this framework and how do you ever determine the real self-interest? Another simple example would be: a student gets warm fuzzies from volunteering, so she frequently engages in working for free. On the other hand, she's short on cash and frequently mentions it, so she could really be spending that time working for pay. Is she really acting on her self-interest? How do you pick which is worth acting on and which is not?People cut and it releases endorphins, so they derive pleasure from it. Suicide is tricky, and I don't want to make sweeping generalizations or pithy statements about it. Many people threaten suicide or make "help me" gestures as a means of testing relationships, seeking validation, getting attention, etc. Others attempt suicide as a means of coping with a particular stressor, familial, economic, psychosocial, etc., which is seen as less unpleasant than dealing with the stressor itself. Others elect suicide as a means out of physical pain (so the motive is to avoid further suffering). Again, it's complex, but there are self-motives involved.
I find it hard to define self-interest here. For example, we have someone who is a bulimic trying to stop or someone who's realized he's got a drinking problem and needs to get it under control. Both are harming themselves with their actions if they continue on that path, thus clearly not acting in their self-interest (and they both realize they are hurting themselves), and yet they arguably have some self-interest vested in their destructive behaviours (booze and food makes them feel good, in a nutshell). How do such deviations from the norm fit into this framework and how do you ever determine the real self-interest? Another simple example would be: a student gets warm fuzzies from volunteering, so she frequently engages in working for free. On the other hand, she's short on cash and frequently mentions it, so she could really be spending that time working for pay. Is she really acting on her self-interest? How do you pick which is worth acting on and which is not?
Agreed. I like the practice of internalizing "big" words and making them your own, and actually using them on occasion, but my rule of thumb is to never use a word that only 10% of my target audience would understand. I'd much prefer 50% or better understanding, even if the majority would never use the word on their own. If I have to find an alternative, I do."AVUNCULAR"? Good lord.
what about when a person saves a cat from a speeding car in a split second?
The issue is self-interest, which is different from selfishness. The former does not necessarily have the same negative connotation as the latter. The issue of psychological egoism isn't a question of selfishness, it's that every action we perform, in either the short or long term, is self-beneficial.
so there's no such thing as a purely unselfish motive?
2) I don't think every action is selfish; I believe there is pure altruism
Nope. People help others because it personally satisfies them or it is the means to an end. Or else it wouldn't happen.
I want to be a doctor for all those cheesy feel-good reasons, but sometimes I think part of my passion and drive comes from the desire to excel at the most challenging thing I can possibly do.
Again, the very fact that you act, voluntarily, means that you wanted it. Therefore, it was in your self-interest.
If you don't believe in altruism, then go talk to any mother, and ask her what she'd do if her child was ever threatened.
That's like saying: Because every square is a rectangle, every rectangle is a square. (faulty logic)
You assume that all actions are always made in one's own self-interest (because, according to you, you have to "want it" in order to act it out), but that's not always the case. When a colony of ants is threatened, worker ants will sacrifice themselves to protect their Queen. They're not putting their self-interest in mind. They don't "want to" die (they're not emo/suicidal). Their motives are purely altruistic. Same goes with a bee's nest. By stinging the intruder, bees sacrifice their life for the safety of the colony.
If you don't believe in altruism, then go talk to any mother, and ask her what she'd do if her child was ever threatened.
The mother's actual response to threats on her children would be compulsory based on evolutionarily hardwired emotions.
If altruism is "sacrificing yourself for others," then the difficulty is in drawing the line on what is altruistic and what's not.
If I get joy out of giving a dollar to charity, does my joy mean I'm not acting altruistically?
you are repyling to something a month and half later?
Yeah I don't come here that often