Every being on Earth is 100% selfish IMO

[KingCrr]

If you really think about it its true. Everything we do is to satisfy our own needs. For example a father doing something for his daughter to make her happy which also makes him feel good knowing she's happy. Jumping in front of a bullet for someone, one would do it because they're either getting paid to do so or trying to save a life of someone they think shouldn't have that fate. It's done becuase you think its the right thing to do so it makes you feel good about yourself or for people that believe in heaven its a ticket through the pearly gates. If somebody can counter argue I would love to hear but every scenario I've come up with ends with the entity doing the "selfless" act still ultimately is doing it for themselves. Its just nature I suppose.

[cfmonkey45]

Well, your basic premise is that "because some one needs a reason or incentive to give up something that is completely irreplaceable everyone is 100% selfish".


Sort of a bad example.

[Helm]

Well there's selfish in a good way and selfish in a bad way.

[Ragabash]

Selfishness and unselfishness are mere words to explain social behaviour, especially that of humans who live in such a complex social society. One can be unselfish but that doesn't mean that this social behaviour is not motivated or influenced by our natural social behaviour codes that exist to benefit the whole specie as much as an invidual.

[Lord de Lyonesse]

This is all ideas that Thomas Hobbes and John Locke pieced together, their notions of State of Nature is really what you are refering to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature

This was really disproved when someone (i forgot who) suggested that this is vaccuos when the person declared if society was based on self interest then there would be no reprodution and therefore no society..

Go figure.

[Phier]

This was really disproved when someone (i forgot who) suggested that this is vaccuos when the person declared if society was based on self interest then there would be no reprodution and therefore no society..

Reproduction is in ones own self interest as well. I have children and they make me happy. If I were to sacrifice myself to save one, also happy, because the alternative was worse to me.

Saints do what causes them the least pain as do sinners.

[Helm]

Well people do have kids out of self interest in a way, when you're old you wouldn't have anyone to look after you otherwise.

[Ragabash]

Well people do have kids out of self interest in a way, when you're old you wouldn't have anyone to look after you otherwise.

Yes, and there is also biological "selfishness" which exist to pass our genes to next generation; not all "selfishness" has to be conscious.

[Lord de Lyonesse]

Well people do have kids out of self interest in a way, when you're old you wouldn't have anyone to look after you otherwise.

Yes but within the thoughts of Locke and Hobbes comes the idea of Self-Interest and rational thinking all part of the philosphy behind it, sure a person with morals based on sefl interest would perhaps pursue coitus. However one with no rational thinking would not.

[Holger Danske]

There are billions of examples that disproves that statement. So I call this an Epic Fail.

[Playfishpaste]

There are people who do nice things for people without feeling good afterward. For instance, a nun who has worked at a nunnery for years and has just become accustomed to sharing food will consider it routine, she will gain no emotional benefit from it. It would become muscle memory, like playing a guitar. Or someone who decides to save someone else's life from a gunshot. They simply are killing themselves with no emotional benefit. They get nothing out of it, they're dead.

At the same time, no action is really entirely a human being's fault, genetically and chemically anyway?

[Lord de Lyonesse]

There are people who do nice things for people without feeling good afterward. For instance, a nun who has worked at a nunnery for years and has just become accustomed to sharing food will consider it routine, she will gain no emotional benefit from it. It would become muscle memory, like playing a guitar. Or someone who decides to save someone else's life from a gunshot. They simply are killing themselves with no emotional benefit. They get nothing out of it, they're dead.

At the same time, no action is really entirely a human being's fault, genetically and chemically anyway?

Ahh but they are, they are getting the feeling that they will become remembered in the annals of history if it is important, and moreover if they live they will be able to get benefits and at least gain themselves recognition...

[Playfishpaste]

Ahh but they are, they are getting the feeling that they will become remembered in the annals of history if it is important, and moreover if they live they will be able to get benefits and at least gain themselves recognition...

You made that assumption. There are some who do it simply to save the person who is about to die, they get no emotional benefit because they don't know if they died or not and it's too fast for a neuropeptide response.

[Hippolord]

To O.P.:

This is a New concept? Damn! I've known and preached that for ages!

Should have coined in on it...

[Lord de Lyonesse]

You made that assumption. There are some who do it simply to save the person who is about to die, they get no emotional benefit because they don't know if they died or not and it's too fast for a neuropeptide response.

It really isnt, and although it is a very synicle viewpoint it is the way to counter your claim of dying for something selflessly...

[Playfishpaste]

It really isnt, and although it is a very synicle viewpoint it is the way to counter your claim of dying for something selflessly...

What? I'm saying that's not the only reason people jump in front of guns.

[KingCrr]

There are people who do nice things for people without feeling good afterward. For instance, a nun who has worked at a nunnery for years and has just become accustomed to sharing food will consider it routine, she will gain no emotional benefit from it. It would become muscle memory, like playing a guitar. Or someone who decides to save someone else's life from a gunshot. They simply are killing themselves with no emotional benefit. They get nothing out of it, they're dead.

At the same time, no action is really entirely a human being's fault, genetically and chemically anyway?

The nun is doing it because of her duty to be a nun. She wouldnt do anything to jeopardize it by not behaving in a nunlike way. And somebody that takes a bullet for someone does it because they know its the right thing to do, they are hoping that they will get into heaven or have they're name live on. And if they survive they could live life knowing they did the right thing.

[Playfishpaste]

The nun is doing it because of her duty to be a nun. She wouldnt do anything to jeopardize it by not behaving in a nunlike way. And somebody that takes a bullet for someone does it because they know its the right thing to do, they are hoping that they will get into heaven or have they're name live on. And if they survive they could live life knowing they did the right thing.

For the first part, not entirely true. Upon repeating the process enough times she will eventually lose control over doing it. She won't be able to not share food because she'll always forget to not share it as it's become muscle memory to just pass somebody a loaf of bread when she has one. For her to not share she'd have to willingly stop herself from moving her hand to give the other person food.

As for the second part, that's one reason they'd do it. Another is that they just would like that person to live on, and they'd get no benefit out of it because they don't know if they succeeded in stopping the bullet. Another reason they'd do it is just because they'd think it's the right thing to do, they wouldn't feel pleasured that they did the right thing though, not necessarily.

[persianfan247]

The act of trying to be selfless is a selfish action because in a society it is viewed as a positive attribrute and as human beings we naturally try to do things seen as positive to gain prestige and this goes towards gaining a position of authority. Any action that you take to help someone benefits you because that person is indebted to you, even if they refuse to fufill the debt. Why die for someone else it gives you the positive feeling that you are doing something that is praised in society, even though its benefits are rather short term, it is impossible to do any action that isn't selfish.

For those people saying that a action that isn't done "just" for you but also benefits someone else isn't selfish, name any action that is done that dosn't have some kind of benefit for someone else, for example the bank robber benefits rival banks.

Though I guess you could change the definition of not being selfish to an act that benefits you but also "intentionally" benifits someone else, but we have to admit that its impossible to be selfless at least and anyone describing an action as selfless or a person as selfless is exagerating things.

[nopasties]

Most altruism has some sort of feed back loop, many can argue different scenarios where the action did good for another but the payment was in some sort of idea or satisfaction of ego. Some scenarios satiate a gnawing sense of guilt or shame, I guess this gets into motivations. If a person is motivated to do good but has some sort of reciprical payment that is somewhat selfish however laudable or moral it may be. In the process of attaining a sense of morality or developing a desire to do altruistic deeds is there not hypothetically a randomness where the individual is doing a deed out of mechanistic experimentation. I mean it is supposedly selfish to do good for social status and such but in the process of finding a reason or that sense of good feeling which compels such behavior there would be early behavior of altruism which did not have the intention of a good feeling but doing such an action the person discovered that that is what they feel good about. The return to such actions of altruism in the goal of good feeling over doing good becomes a form of selfishness but I'm saying there is usually a transitionary phase that may preclude even this.