The Selfish Nature Of All Actions

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

You truely are a thread killer--------stay away from me --clear enough?

But, tell me why you think that a selfish person who is not successful becomes suddenly not selfish. And why you think that a person who happens to be made happy by doing good things for others, but doesn't do those good things just in order to be made happy, is selfish. And you might also mention why you think that someone may be selfish but not affect anyone adversely.

Incidentally, why do you think that objections to what you pontificate about are "thread killers"? Don't you know that philosophy is dialectic or, as Socrates said, "a conversation". If you would prefer that no one object to your views, you ought to mention that at the beginning. Of course, once you start a thread you don't own it. All you have done is start it. You have very peculiar ideas about what philosophy is all about.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

But, tell me why you think that a selfish person who is not successful becomes suddenly not selfish. And why you think that a person who happens to be made happy by doing good things for others, but doesn't do those good things just in order to be made happy, is selfish. And you might also mention why you think that someone may be selfish but not affect anyone adversely.

Kennethamy,

You are such a confused ball of contradiction that you have been playing both sides of the argument,you have me disagreeing with you when it has not occured.You do not need anyone else in the dialogue with you,this is your form of philosophy-------I tried being respectful, but you will not have that will you.

You still have not read the material the thread was based on and recommended.You either do not read the posts of others or you simply skim them and fail to understand them,perhaps that is at the root of your aversion to reading.Seeing as you are so capable of individual dialogue why don't you just enjoy yourself,just don't get it on the sheets.By the way this is the last communication between us-------you do understand? Silence IS the correct answer!!

[kennethamy]

[quote=boagie;3537]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

But, tell me why you think that a selfish person who is not successful becomes suddenly not selfish. And why you think that a person who happens to be made happy by doing good things for others, but doesn't do those good things just in order to be made happy, is selfish. And you might also mention why you think that someone may be selfish but not affect anyone adversely.

Kennethamy,



You are such a confused ball of contradiction that you have been playing both sides of the argument,you have me disagreeing with you when it has not occured.You do not need anyone else in the dialogue with you,this is your form of philosophy-------I tried being respectful, but you will not have that will you.

You still have not read the material the thread was based on and recommended.You either do not read the posts of others or you simply skim them and fail to understand them,perhaps that is at the root of your aversion to reading.Seeing as you are so capable of individual dialogue why don't you just enjoy yourself,just don't get it on the sheets.By the way this is the last communication between us-------you do understand? Silence IS the correct answer!!

Have you any answers to my three questions? Or indeed why you believe that any objections a "thead killers", or why you believe you own this thread? Look at all the time you are wasting. If you could provide answers to my questions your agitation would be at an end.

As someone has pointed out, abuse is no argument. No place have I abused you. And your abuse is so vulgar, you should be embarrassed. I simply asked you to defend your beliefs. Why don't you try doing that? That is what this, or any philosophy thread, is all about. Now, calm down, and think about my objections.

[boagie]

Not the right answer,the instructions cannot be made simplier---good by

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

Not the right answer,the instructions cannot be made simplier---good by

And you have no answers.

[Justin]

Looks like this thread is getting a little out of hand. Let's not forget that while we may be in a philosophy forum, that we all do come from different backgrounds and were raised with different beliefs and so on. Once again it's important that we start where people are, not where we expect them to be.

So, moving forward... let's build upon the positives of each person in the forum rather than the alternative.

As for the selfish nature of all actions... In order to find yourself, you must give yourself away. With this, I'd like to once again publish something I've found to be profound and it has much to do with this thread. This was written by the deceased Lao Russell:

• To bring blessings upon yourself, bless your neighbor.
• To enrich yourself, enrich your neighbor.
• Honor your neighbor and your neighbor will honor you.
• To sorely hurt yourself, hurt your neighbor.
• He who seeks love will find it by giving it.
• The measure of a mans wealth, is the measure of the wealth he has given.
• To enrich yourself with many friends, enrich your friends with yourself.
• That which you take away from any man, the world will take away from you.
• Peace and happiness do not come to you from the horizon. The spread from you out into infinity beyond your horizon.
• The whole Universe is a mirror which reflects back to you, that which you reflect into it.
• Love is like the ascent of a high mountain peak. It comes ever nearer to you as you go ever nearer to it.

The above code of ethics could be considered selfish in many ways yet it rings of truth. It's all about human relations in the end that will directly effect each and every one of us and we can either witness the unfolding and uplifting of mankind or the fall of humanity. How we speak to each other and how we communicate with each other is going be the ultimate factor.

As far as Twain... He was a brilliant man. Not only that, he surrounded himself with some of the most brilliant men of that time and era. Twain was close to Edward Markham, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Alexis Carroll, Walter Russell, Andrew Carnegie and many other great minds of that time. Twain also played a part in creating the Public Libraries, the Rotary Club, Boy Scouts of America and so on.

Let's build upon the positives and provide an environment for understanding, change and the evolution of mankind.

OK, I'm done rambling...

[Aristoddler]

Looks like this thread is getting a little out of hand on the personal attacks.

I was just about to kill it...thanks Justin.

There's no debating Twain's brilliance as a writer or storyteller, but when it comes to his philosophies on life, he did have a few opinions that were quite ahead of his time and therefore was more than likely misquoted on several occasions due to the political nature of some of his topics.
He may have been on course with the selfless acts idea though.

There have been many stories of people doing great heroic deeds of selfless nature, and many of them are truly selfless...but I wonder how many of them were done by people who were simply trying to martyr themselves, thereby making a selfish act out of a selfless one?

[boagie]

The intent of the thread was to point out the truth of what Mark Twain stated about our modiviation toward action.The intent was to examine the logic of "What Is Man" and then balance it againt Schopenhaur's theory of what happens when someone sacrifices himself for that of another.Which sheds some light upon the understanding not only of self-sacrifice but of the concept of morality in general.The problem of semantics was acknowledge and mutually understood by most people involved including myself,when the said problem is understood,it is nolonger a problem.I simply wished to get on with the topic-----past tense.It did have the potential of being a most interest thread.I nolonger have any taste for further dialogue on the topic.



Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one"
Albert Einstein

[Aristoddler]

Originally Posted by boagie

...I nolonger have any taste for further dialogue on the topic.

I do, it's a good topic...I'd like to hear what people have to say about it, now that it's been clarified what the intent was in the beginning of it all.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Bii

Perhaps the use of the term 'selfishness' is what causes people to have a problem with the premise as selfishness is something people are generally taught is a negative trait. However, I entirely agree that all action is motivated by self interest, whether it is because the action makes you feel good, or because the choice you make is a 'lesser of two evils' choice. I think the only addition I would make to this premise is that people will generally put survival first, and 'happiness' next.

self·ish /ˈsɛlfɪʃ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sel-fish] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1.devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others. 2.characterized by or manifesting concern or care only for oneself: selfish motives.
I think that if one cares for oneself...regardless of others, or manifests concern or care only for oneself, that is called "selfishness" in English, and would deserve, I think, to be considered negatively by most people, even including you.* Now, of course, if you would like to use another word for it, and define "selfishness" differently, so that it is considered a positive trait, you are, I suppose, free to do so, at the cost, of course, of miscommunication. But remember, you will probably have to invent another word for what used to be called "selfishness" before you decided to redefine selfishness. So that would seem to me a waste of motion and effort. But, it is a free country. I think that someone who is concerned only for his own welfare, and disregards the welfare of others is someone I would certainly regard negatively, and most others would too. But maybe you are far more tolerant of others than I (and, I wager) most people are.

* Perhaps an example is called for. Suppose you were a child, and so was your brother. And suppose that your mother left the two of you a piece of cake each, and a glass of milk, to have after you both returned from school. And suppose your brother ate not only his own cake and milk, but ate yours before you arrived. Would you not look upon his actions negatively? And, I suppose, so would your mother. She might even say to him that he had been selfish.

The trouble with so much philosophy is that it is done in abstraction. An example or two is always helpful for bringing us down to reality, and remind us of how we really think about the matter.