• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

there is no such thing as a selfless act

Impacto Profundo said:
so, your point is: no acts are selfless, because no acts are selfless.
Click to expand...

Whatever makes it easier for you...

I thought I'd made it clear long ago that we disagreed on a vital semantic issue, that lays earlier than the discussion has mostly revolved around.
 
Rated E - If I'm sitting on a chair and you stand in front of me before whacking me on the knee with a baseball bat, the following act of me kicking you in the nuts is most definitely a selfless one.

:)
 
alasdairm said:
i was having a heated discussion recently with a friend who posited that there is no such thing as a completely selfless act. he argued that even the most overt acts of altruism are done, in part, because they fulfill some need in the person doing them...

alasdair
Click to expand...

Sounds very Kantian to me, in which I agree. I don't think there's anything wrong with that though. For example, I would be more than happy to help get a poor kitty down from a tree branch because 1) I want the kitty to be ok, and 2) I like doing things that make me happy -- which is selfish in a GOOD way.
 
Every act of human nature is done for one's self (?)

There's been a thing going through my mind for a few years now, and it's been driving me crazy. These are the basics to this principle:

People will always do what they feel is will make themselves feel the best. People's greed or selflessness are measured on how much gratification you get from helping others. The more happy helping others makes you feel, the more you do it, so you are a generous person. Greed is the opposite. EVERY ACT OF HUMAN NATURE IS DONE FOR ONE'S SELF.

The thing about this is that it makes perfect sense. But, it would just feel so bad, knowing that every act that you for someone else is done just for yourself.

Do you guys think that we (the human race) are just helping others for ourselves? Or do you think that there's something more to it; that we actually care about others? But if we care about others, is it just for ourselves? But if we do it just for ourselves, than we don't care about others...

See, this is why this has been bugging me. Any thoughts?

Oh yeah, and I'm new to TDS, so please tell me if this is an appropriate post.

Thanks.
 
The thing about this principle is not that we don't do things for others also, it's just that even when we think we are being selfless, we are getting something out of it--a good feeling from doing something good.

So, sure, we are very selfish creatures, but that doesn't mean we can't care for others also.

We may get a good feeling from helping someone, but from not helping someone, perhaps we could have gotten a bigger gain. We still help people right?



Also, there are definitely exceptions--someone who is willing to put themselves in harms way for someone else--often these situations, such as someone jumping in front of a bullet for someone else, is down without even enough time to think. So obviously, we have the tendency in us to go against that as well.
 
(Response to paragraph 3) - We may have gotten a bigger gain from not helping people, but we'd also feel like an asshole, so maybe we're just avoiding that feeling.

(Response to paragraph 4) - Perhaps we jump in front of a bullet because we feel that it's a nessesary sacrifice, and going without fuffiling that feeling would leave us feeling that we should have made the sacrifice.

These are maybes, because there's no true way to know. I just want to know if it's possible, I guess.
 
Sentimental said:
(Response to paragraph 4) - Perhaps we jump in front of a bullet because we feel that it's a nessesary sacrifice, and going without fuffiling that feeling would leave us feeling that we should have made the sacrifice.
Click to expand...

I guess I don't really buy that, cause it is such a knee-jerk reaction (I'm assuming...I've never done it, but there isn't much time after a bullet is shot to think about what to do). Also, if you end up dead there really won't be time to bask in the glory of your sacrifice.
 
I see what you mean with the quick reaction part. I still think it's possible that not nessicarilly the full thought goes through our head, just the feeling before we take the action.

If the other person dies, I'd probably feel like shit because I didn't take the fall, and I could have saved them. (That's if I really, really cared about the person.)
 
I agree that there isn't any pure altruism. Even the most self sacrificing acts provide a feeling of being right or good. This thread has a lot of affinity with an existing thread in Philosophy & Spirituality, there is no such thing as a selfless act . Sentimental, this is a good topic but I think it has more affinity with P&S than TDS. I'm going to send it over there. Usual proviso that if I chose poorly feel free to send back & I'll try to find another home. :)

The Dark Side--------------------------------------------------------------------------> Philosophy and Spirituality
 
Enki said:
I agree that there isn't any pure altruism. Even the most self sacrificing acts provide a feeling of being right or good. This thread has a lot of affinity with an existing thread in Philosophy & Spirituality, there is no such thing as a selfless act . Sentimental, this is a good topic but I think it has more affinity with P&S than TDS. I'm going to send it over there. Usual proviso that if I chose poorly feel free to send back & I'll try to find another home. :)

The Dark Side--------------------------------------------------------------------------> Philosophy and Spirituality
Click to expand...

Thank you Enki. Merged.
 
If someone asks me "Can you?", my first thought is always "I can". Not with any thought of benefit for myself, but of sheer ability to deliver what was requested. I'm not sure if I'm a little od school that way.
 
^ In terms of the way people evaluate and justify their own behavior, and that of others, I'd have to say yes. Does it change the thing-in-itself which is the pure action? Maybe not. But it sure can change where we place that action in our overall scheme of things, as sentient actors.
 
^ Yeah, I think it does. As someone said before, if every act is selfish then selfishness clearly can't be used as a criteria for discriminating between actions. But in terms of understanding my motivation and why I act the way I do, I think it matters quite a lot.
 
^Why? If you do something good, that makes you feel happy AND someone else, what does it matter if there is a degree of selfishness in it?
 
No one hear can claim to actually know the intent or motive of someone who is making a selfless act, and therefore cannot actually know whether or not they're doing it for a sense of gratification, to become a hero or whatever other stupid shit some of you guys came up with.

People don't need a reason to help.

For me, things are instinctual. Someone is in trouble? I help, regardless of the dangers. I do not do it to be regarded as a hero or to feel better about myself. Fuck, I don't even think about the after effects of the actions. I do it because it is the right thing to do or because its on a spur of the moment rather than, 'Ooh everyone will love me for this'.

Why everyone here insists that everyone is selfish and hell-bent on making themselves feel better is dumb...to be quite frank. If it is all selfish, then there is no need for the word selfless eh?

In any case, all selfless acts are still appreciated. I do not give a shit about the intent the person had. They helped someone. That is the point.
 
The people here who insist that every human being here is selfish regardless of intent really put me off. Kind of frustrating that you would staunchly defend a belief in something so negative like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top