Khorib wrote:
One would argue that that person living is more important to him at that moment than his own life, and is therefore benefiting. I don’t believe that anyone can purposefully commit a completely altruistic act.
But in the end that person isn’t benefiting.
For that person at that moment, the benefit for him is the person he saved living... and it is a benefit for him only because he felt it was more important than his own life.
Online Predator wrote:
lol We’ve always been on the same page. I just make it hard for people to figure it out. I find joy in it when people do finally realize things without me giving them the entire answer. It means they actually know what they’re talking about.
About omission, I can say that for some but some people can die for people they hate and won’t get anything out of it because they’re dead. They get their goal but that’s nothing that helps them in the least. Only that they’re goal is fulfilled. I think most people have do get something out of most situations and actions they choose to do or at least in some way want to but that isn’t their driving force to do something. In fact, some may even ignore it and not do something based on it. They still get it but they didn’t do it for that.
I’ll agree with that, I don’t believe it has to be a conscious driving force, but I believe most of the selfishness lies within the subconscious to justify doing things we don’t want to do or wouldn’t normally do.
WHat goes for one person or situation doesn’t always go for another.
Khorib wrote:
One would argue that that person living is more important to him at that moment than his own life, and is therefore benefiting. I don’t believe that anyone can purposefully commit a completely altruistic act.
But in the end that person isn’t benefiting.
For that person at that moment, the benefit for him is the person he saved living... and it is a benefit for him only because he felt it was more important than his own life.
and whats to say that that a completion of a goal isn’t a an achievement of sorts? People do things for all kinds of reasons, but you can still find, however small it may be, some tiny or many selfish aspects.
Again, not everyone fulfills a goal because they’ll get something out of it or because it feels good.
No, not for everyone. And what you’re describing isn’t selfishness. Selfishness is doing it all for glory or harming someone else that doesn’t need to be harmed in the process.
Sure, you can feel good or get something out of it but that doesn’t mean you’re doing it to feel good or get something out of it. You may even want glory but that doesn’t mean you did it for glory.
I only used the word “selfish” as an antonym to “selfless”. I’m not trying to use it in terms of absolute. My overall point is that one cannot be without the other and that there is no black and white. One action can certainly be a much lighter or darker shade, but in the end, they are ALL shades of gray.
p.s. my reply was late due to food and discussing the thread and similar arguments amongst the roommates... and several smoke breaks :P
The human mind is a pretty complex thing, and although it only makes sense that every action has some sort of pre-meditated benefit attached to it, I think it would be remiss to assume that it was even that simplistic.
Human brains can work in very different ways and work differently at different stages in life. Small children may demonstrate altruistic acts without even really knowing why...who knows. And what about people with mental illnesses, or who have rather different thought patterns then most.
And some of those shades of grey are so dark, that whos to say whether it’s alturistic in the end?
After all, it is just a word, and a word can hardly encompass all the intricacies.
Haha, all of that just to say...whether classified as altruistic or not I bet that there are certain people or situations where the premeditated benefit of action was not a factor in their behavior, rare or otherwise.
»
Religion
» There is no such thing as a Completely Selfless act
