The Selfish Nature Of All Actions

[boagie]

You win guys,its a black and white world!

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

You win guys,its a black and white world!

Well, at least one in which rational argument often wins. No, it is not a black or white world. But if you ignore a distinction like that of doing something selfish, and doing something self-interested, it certainly can seem to you to be a black or white world.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

Well, at least one in which rational argument often wins. No, it is not a black or white world. But if you ignore a distinction like that of doing something selfish, and doing something self-interested, it certainly can seem to you to be a black or white world.

kennethamy,

Assume I acknowlege your wisdom here, as I personally have no problem with there being selfish behaviour or self-serveing behaviour, where would you like to take this.Does your explanation tell us that when someone sacrifice themselves for complete strangers, its because he wants them to be REALLY HAPPY? Is this your conclusion? Please we are at a point I think where you so strongly disprove of the possiablities I have presented, it is time for you to put forth your theory[explanation].If self-sacifice is done for this purpose,to make people really happy, it need to be established now.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

kennethamy,

Assume I acknowlege your wisdom here, as I personally have no problem with there being selfish behaviour or self-serveing behaviour, where would you like to take this.Does your explanation tell us that when someone sacrifice themselves for complete strangers, its because he wants them to be REALLY HAPPY? Is this your conclusion? Please we are at a point I think where you so strongly disprove of the possiablities I have presented, it is time for you to put forth your theory[explanation].If self-sacifice is done for this purpose,to make people really happy, it need to be established now.

It would depend on the circumstances. But I would say that often when someone helps others, it is in order to relieve them of distress. I suppose if that happens, it will make them happier than they were when they were in distress, and the agent had that in mind when he decided to help them. After all, if someone runs out of gas while driving, and needs help, and someone comes along who goes out of his way to take him to a gas station where he can get some gas, and then takes him back to his car, I imagine that the man who ran out of gas will be happier than he would have been if he had not been aided. Wouldn't you? And, wouldn't you think that the person who aided him would have that in mind? I hope this example makes the point clear.

[OldCrow]

Could it be said that acts of instinct are not self serving, as it is not nesessarly a conscious choice. We drink water in order to survive. We eat in order to survive. The mind overlays these instinctual drives with desire in order to make sure that we do not avoid them consciously. I sleep because my body does so with or without my selfish or self-interested desire. I actually desire not to sleep.. but it happens anyway.

(IMHO) Self-interest and selfishness require a conscious effort.

On a conscious level, I desire (selfish act) to protect my progeny from danger. Yet if they are about to be harmed, I do not think befor I act. At that moment I have no self serving desire to be a good dad, or a good person. There is no thoughts of 'I'm a hero to my kids..' I do not think of how acting or not acting will make me feel after the fact. I just act. Instinct drives me to act with out thought for anything but their immediate safty. I can not see the selfishness of such actions.

I think this has been explored eariler... but I thought I'd throw my half cent in anyway...

[Justin]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

A many would be loony on the score of just rational cost-benefit analysis to risk death (for heaven's sakes) just so that he can avoid the discomfort of a guilty conscience (which is probably unjustified) thereafter. Can you imagine the man arguing with himself: "if I don't risk my life, the discomfort will be very great. So I'll risk the probability of death". It is preposterous.

Kenneth, a man doesn't sit there and justify or argue with himself prior to doing something. If man's actions are controlled by his spirit, then there's no time to reason the benefits of doing the action. We call it instinct but the spirit will act accordingly in a split second to satisfy spiritual needs. Twain offered several tests which proved to the student than man cannot control his spirit. It's the spirit that controls the man. An example could be in thoughts.

Later on today, put it into your head what you will think of first thing tomorrow. Whatever it is, place it in your mind so that the first thing you wake up in the morning, your mind with be thinking of the thought you had instructed to it. You'll find it very difficult to force your mind to think about what you have instructed it to.

Originally Posted by kennethamy

It would depend on the circumstances. But I would say that often when someone helps others, it is in order to relieve them of distress. I suppose if that happens, it will make them happier than they were when they were in distress, and the agent had that in mind when he decided to help them. After all, if someone runs out of gas while driving, and needs help, and someone comes along who goes out of his way to take him to a gas station where he can get some gas, and then takes him back to his car, I imagine that the man who ran out of gas will be happier than he would have been if he had not been aided. Wouldn't you? And, wouldn't you think that the person who aided him would have that in mind? I hope this example makes the point clear.

The agent in the above paragraph brought himself spiritual contentment and peace of mind because of how it made the agent feel helping another man out in need. Sure, it made the day of the stranded guy and it was probably appreciated... and in turn, this brought the agent spiritual contentment because he felt good about what he had done.

Why did he stop in the first place? The agent could have driven by. However, if he had done that, in this case, the spirit of the agent would have suffered discomfort because of the thoughts he was having. The agent would have felt uncomfortable because he didn't stop. Sure helping the guy is the immediate thought but if he didn't help when he could have, he would be struggling with himself and his spiritual contentment. Thoughts could have raced through his mind.

After the act, both the stranded fellow and the agents' spirits smile with contentment. In the case above, the agent could do no other than the leadings of his spirit in search of contentment.

This guy that was stranded could be an escaped convict or a murderer... the agent doesn't know him. Does the agent care?... not really because what matters to him is the he doesn't pass the opportunity to satisfy his own spirit.

The beauty of it is that it is a win-win situation for both. When you make someone else feel good, most often it makes you feel good. Our intentions might not be selfish, but the spirit will lead the man to none other than it's own peace of mind and spiritual contentment. If it's in balance with the Universe, everyone involved will win.

Let's take a greater look at this. Offer circumstances in which this would not be the case. We can break them down further like Twain did to find the underlying principle.

Does this make any sense?

• What you do to another person you do to yourself.
• The world is a reflection of what we reflect into it.
• When you hurt your neighbor, you hurt yourself.
• If you make another mans' spirit suffer discomfort, your spirit will suffer discomfort.

So, is it selfish or is it selfless? Either way, when we lift another human being, we lift ourselves. This could be construed as selfish but the principle of it goes back centuries and is also a message in the Bible.

Great thread! Look forward to more reading on this, thank you all for sharing your thoughts.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

It would depend on the circumstances. But I would say that often when someone helps others, it is in order to relieve them of distress. I suppose if that happens, it will make them happier than they were when they were in distress, and the agent had that in mind when he decided to help them. After all, if someone runs out of gas while driving, and needs help, and someone comes along who goes out of his way to take him to a gas station where he can get some gas, and then takes him back to his car, I imagine that the man who ran out of gas will be happier than he would have been if he had not been aided. Wouldn't you? And, wouldn't you think that the person who aided him would have that in mind? I hope this example makes the point clear.

kennethamy,

So we are then to believe that the person who sacrifices themselves to another/a compete stranger, it is to increase their happyness.Where is the distress that caused the action if not in the subject sacrificeing himself.A psychopath would not be moved to action at his own expense.If you would be believed you must explain the working of such psychological revelation,so simple it has been over looked by the psychological community.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Justin

The agent in the above paragraph brought himself spiritual contentment and peace of mind because of how it made the agent feel helping another man out in need.

Could be. I don't know, since I made up the story. But even if it is true that all this contentment was brought to the agent, what makes you think that the agent did what he did in order to achieve that contentment? He may have done it only to help the person who ran out of gas? It is one thing to to something in order get something out of it. It is quite a different thing to do something to help the person and distress and, then, get the satisfaction of helping another in distress. Just because the latter occurs, it does not mean that was the motive. The motive may have been simply to help another person. That the agent received satisfaction from helping another person is just fine. But why do you think it was the agent's motive?

[boagie]

Welcome OldCrow!!

Instincts are an interesting topic perhaps the purest form of self-interest, because it is bred in the bone does not negate its value as self-interest. There are a number of understands around the term consciousness and intelligence. Most of the effects of instinct would be acknowledge to be in the interest of the organism to preform,so linking it back we might assume both for the animal and its species the preformance was indeed modivated by self-interest, imprinted over the eons to react to the same triggers.

You are correct though we in this discussion are speaking,or so we think,of a conscious evaluation modivating our actions.If one is going to do something because it is the right thing to do,he must think it is the right thing to do.If he wishes to consider himself as the type of person whom does the right thing when its call for, he must perform this act to maintain his self image.There is some material this discussion was based upon,Mark Twain's "What Is Man", and Schopenhaur's "The Foundations Of Morality" much of the confusion in this thread is due to not everyone have read the material.


As to your acting without thought it takes a thought to move your hand to touch your face,it does not happen, accept perhaps in the case of self-sacrifice,there something else happens Schopenhaur calls it a break through,where your normal morality is taken to new heights,here identification with other is absolute the concept of self incompasses other.In this state the sacrifice is to the larger concept of the self.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

kennethamy,

So we are then to believe that the person who sacrifices themselves to another/a compete stranger, it is to increase their happyness.Where is the distress that caused the action if not in the subject sacrificeing himself.A psychopath would not be moved to action at his own expense.If you would be believed you must explain the working of such psychological revelation,so simple it has been over looked by the psychological community.

I don't think you understand. It was the person who ran out of gas who was distressed. Wouldn't you be? The person who helped, was inconvenienced, but that is just what was nice about him.
Look, it isn't such a big deal to go out of your way to drive someone to a gas station, and then drive him back to his car. Why would someone have to be a psychopath to do that? Maybe he is just being nice. Has the motive of just being nice been overlooked by the psychological community? Why do you think so. But, suppose it has been, so much the worse for the psychological community.