The Selfish Nature Of All Actions

[Mr. Fight the Power]

Originally Posted by Wizzy

*Edit
and isn't selfish and self-interest pretty much the same thing? I belive it is anyways...

Yes, they can be, but selfish is a loaded word and I think using "self-interested" makes it easier to view this argument in terms of will, intent, and most importantly, values.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fight the Power

Yes, they can be, but selfish is a loaded word and I think using "self-interested" makes it easier to view this argument in terms of will, intent, and most importantly, values.

Mr Fight The Power,

I agree whole heartedly, but, is it not simple enough just to realize that the one term selfish, can have more than one application. These applications on the one hand are telling us something of the state of the self in its egocentric nature. On the other side, it is indicateting the quality of the intent of ones action, the selfish and selfless in comparison, two shades of one colour. It is about the functionality of the self is it not, it is not about a value judgement after the fact. Come to think of it Mr Fight the power, will, intent and values are the more straight forward, less likely to confuse I suppose.

[Mr. Fight the Power]

Originally Posted by boagie

Mr Fight The Power,

I agree whole heartedly, but, is it not simple enough just to realize that the one term selfish, can have more than one application. These applications on the one hand are telling us something of the state of the self in its egocentric nature. On the other side, it is indicateting the quality of the intent of ones action, the selfish and selfless in comparison, two shades of one colour. It is about the functionality of the self is it not, it is not about a value judgement after the fact. Come to think of it Mr Fight the power, will, intent and values are the more straight forward, less likely to confuse I suppose.

Yes, when you use the word selfish it is too easy to confuse with statements of value and morality, when this argument concerns phenomenology, which supersedes any statement of value or morality.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fight the Power

Yes, when you use the word selfish it is too easy to confuse with statements of value and morality, when this argument concerns phenomenology, which supersedes any statement of value or morality.

Since the English term, "selfish" means pursuing your own interest at the expense of others, it is a negative moral term in English since that sort of action is a morally bad action. ("Stealing" is another such term in English). So, when I speak English, or hear English, and hear the term being used, that is I what I mean by it, and is what understand others to mean by it. What is the point of using the term, and changing its meaning to fit some philosophical view? I don't understand how any of this is about phenomenology (whatever that may be).

[boagie]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

Since the English term, "selfish" means pursuing your own interest at the expense of others, it is a negative moral term in English since that sort of action is a morally bad action. ("Stealing" is another such term in English). So, when I speak English, or hear English, and hear the term being used, that is I what I mean by it, and is what understand others to mean by it. What is the point of using the term, and changing its meaning to fit some philosophical view? I don't understand how any of this is about phenomenology (whatever that may be).

Kennethamy,

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

Kennethamy,

We are all familar with dictionaries, but, if you don't understand what phenomenology is, it is easy enough to get into. I think it might be discribed as the ontology of its order and function. Indeed the selfish nature of the self's action as function is what we have be underlineing, as a system it is like a self reaffirming loop. Perhaps this is not so clear either, perhaps MFTP can clearify.

I suppose it is a clear as you can make that kind of thing. But the point is that whatever phenomenological analysis you choose to do on selfishness, you have first to be sure you are targeting selfishness, and not confusing it with something else, say, self-interest. And for that, I am afraid, you have to know what "selfish" means, and for that, you had better look it up in some good dictionary.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

I suppose it is a clear as you can make that kind of thing. But the point is that whatever phenomenological analysis you choose to do on selfishness, you have first to be sure you are targeting selfishness, and not confusing it with something else, say, self-interest. And for that, I am afraid, you have to know what "selfish" means, and for that, you had better look it up in some good dictionary.

kennethamy.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

kennethamy.

The only one confused here is you. At least look into the topic of phenomenology, it is an important catagory of philosophy. The dictionary meaning is simplistic, do you really think the whole f---g world is out of step but you and cannot grasp the dictionary meaning.

No profanity is required. I have read (about as much as I can take, of phenomenology). The dictionary meaning may be simplistic, as you say, but don't you think that we should, at least, start from there, so we, at least, start on the same page even if we don't all end on the same page?

[boagie]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

No profanity is required. I have read (about as much as I can take, of phenomenology). The dictionary meaning may be simplistic, as you say, but don't you think that we should, at least, start from there, so we, at least, start on the same page even if we don't all end on the same page?

kennethamy,

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by boagie

kennethamy,

You can sell those magic beans at market lad---------LOL!!

Is that supposed to be an argued rebuttal, or have you anything else to say except that you don't like what wrote? This is a discussion forum, and to discuss is not to retort, "that's what you say!". I guess you have reached the end of your ability to argue your view.