First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Selfishness or Selflessness?
MJRaNa 
24771 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Florida
Offline
Posted 2/28/17
lol
3943 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Mᴇᴡɴɪ
Offline
Posted 3/1/17


I only do things for people I like because I generally hate everyone. I've had friends who were people-pleasers, and I never quite understood it. Wanting people to like you isn't a crime though.
1316 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Helsinki
Offline
Posted 3/1/17
Opposing sides of the same coin. Where does one end and the other begin, who knows.
5054 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/1/17
I dunno, I do "selfless" things despite hating myself for not being more selfish, without gaining much either.
Posted 3/1/17
I only help people who I like even if I don't get anything out of it.
27133 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 3/1/17 , edited 3/1/17
If you define selfless as being more concerned with another person's needs or desires over one's own then something only becomes selfish when your needs and desires are greater than the consideration you give to other person's. Selfless acts, however, are exceedingly rare--if I were to place a guess on the motivation for such it would be cognitive--not affective empathy. I would think that acts motivated by affective empathy are more likely the consequence of one's shared distress rather than conscious motivation towards another. It depends how one evaluates motivation though--done for the sake of helping another, for our shared joy, or for the sake of the other entity? How much of that motivation is consciously driven? I suppose such is more based on theory of mind more than anything, something I rather lack. I am more selfishly driven than most human beings and yet with some awareness still that other person's have thoughts and feelings of their own--but on a more abstract and vague level do I comprehend it. It's that same imbalance that escalates the mild distress that others are more dishonest rather than simply motivated by something beyond my implicit understanding. It is that intrinsic element, theory of mind--I believe--that is the cognitive mechanism for most credibly defined selfless acts. The intrinsic understanding that another person has desires, feelings, thought etc. of their own--that factor in the motivation equation is what most likely signifies a selfless behavior.

If you define selfless as not having any regard for one's own needs and desires--I do not find that to be a human possibility.

19763 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 3/1/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


If you define selfless as not having any regard for one's own needs and desires--I do not find that to be a human possibility.



Then explain the soldier who throws himself on the grenade, the mother who feeds her child her last bit of food , or the citizen who stands against their unjust government. There are plenty of people who utterly disregard their own needs and desires for the sake of others, often to the point of death or intense suffering. They do not whimper nor moan, or even scheme of some reward internal or external . Selfless acts are not a mystery nor an impossibility.

Selfless is the state humanity was meant to occupy. Not the desire or greed so many of us give into. Humanity is more then base flesh and carnal cravings. And many shining examples amongst us show this in their everyday acts, or in the actions they do right before their deaths. The Doctor who walks through a battlefield to treat the sick and injured , The politician that introduces the law that truly makes men equal, The woman volunteering at a soup kitchen . They and many more show that Selfless acts aren't some grand thing to be dissected like some med students cadaver.

If we become so bitter and disillusioned with life that we can only see lies and self motivation in everything someone does what is the point? Such a state of mind is in my mind a fate worse then death. Cause to me it means you've given up, opted out of the thing that makes us Human.
27133 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 3/1/17 , edited 3/1/17

Ranwolf wrote:

Then explain the soldier who throws himself on the grenade, the mother who feeds her child her last bit of food , or the citizen who stands against their unjust government. There are plenty of people who utterly disregard their own needs and desires for the sake of others, often to the point of death or intense suffering. They do not whimper nor moan, or even scheme of some reward internal or external . Selfless acts are not a mystery nor an impossibility.

Selfless is the state humanity was meant to occupy. Not the desire or greed so many of us give into. Humanity is more then base flesh and carnal cravings. And many shining examples amongst us show this in their everyday acts, or in the actions they do right before their deaths. The Doctor who walks through a battlefield to treat the sick and injured , The politician that introduces the law that truly makes men equal, The woman volunteering at a soup kitchen . They and many more show that Selfless acts aren't some grand thing to be dissected like some med students cadaver.

If we become so bitter and disillusioned with life that we can only see lies and self motivation in everything someone does what is the point? Such a state of mind is in my mind a fate worse then death. Cause to me it means you've given up, opted out of the thing that makes us Human.


Which is why I say I don't think it possible to have no motivation of one's own in the equation. While, surely, we can consider such acts more likely motivated in regards to others--it cannot be said there was no motivation on part of the martyr to do "good". Some acts can be weighed more selfless than others, but to act without any thought's and feelings of one's own--would it be humanly possible or selfless at all? Is it selfless to sacrifice "nothing"--is it possible for a human to be on such a level to even have such a state? Certainly those that commit suicide view their lives as less or close to nothing--but that's not the same as having no thoughts and feelings of one's own.

We deem those acts selfless because they have their own thoughts and desires, but still place the value of another person's above their own.

With this in mind the more weight one's own thoughts and desires have the more selfless acts one is capable of. The man who views his life in gold but would still sacrifice it for his daughter's life gives more than the man who deems his life worth a penny and would sacrifice it to a near passerby.

Would you not say that a man who wants to die and jumps on a grenade is equivalent to a man who wants to live and go home to his loving wife and does the same? The latter is more selfless, surely.

19763 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 3/1/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


Which is why I say I don't think it possible to have no motivation of one's own in the equation. While, surely, we can consider such acts more likely motivated in regards to others--it cannot be said there was no motivation on part of the martyr to do "good". Some acts can be weighed more selfless than others, but to act without any thought's and feelings of one's own--would it be humanly possible or selfless at all? Is it selfless to sacrifice "nothing"--is it possible for a human to be on such a level to even have such a state? Certainly those that commit suicide view their lives as less or close to nothing--but that's not the same as having no thoughts and feelings of one's own.

We deem those acts selfless because they have their own thoughts and desires, but still place the value of another person's above their own.

With this in mind the weight one's own thoughts and desires have the more selfless acts one is capable of. The man who views his life in gold but would still sacrifice it for his daughter's life gives more than the man who bears his life as invaluable and would sacrifice it to a near passerby.

Would you not say that a man who wants to die and jumps on a grenade is equivalent to a man who wants to live and go home to his loving wife and does the same? The latter is more selfless, surely.



So what you're saying is that one life holds more value then other? While this can be intrinsically true in some cases and God knows I've argued as such in the past . I can only really apply such a statement to those that have given up their humanity in exchange for whatever petty reward is on offer.

A human's life is worth the same regardless of if it is a man's daughter , a man's wife , or man's platoon mates. A man serves in a platoon , and he serves alongside roughly 32 men . And these 32 men have spouses and children of their own, families that will miss them should they die.

A man throws himself on the grenade and saves say 64 people suffering or even 96 should each of his platoon mates have a wife and a child. We can add even more people to that list should we include parents, siblings, and friends.

The man who dodges the grenade and lets 32 of his friends die in the blast and lives is not committing a selfless act in living to see his family again. He has bought their happiness at the price of 96 or more other people's suffering and sorrow. Such a thing is a selfish act worthy only of condemnation.
27133 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 3/1/17 , edited 3/1/17

Ranwolf wrote:
So what you're saying is that one life holds more value then other? While this can be intrinsically true in some cases and God knows I've argued as such in the past . I can only really apply such a statement to those that have given up their humanity in exchange for whatever petty reward is on offer.

A human's life is worth the same regardless of if it is a man's daughter , a man's wife , or man's platoon mates. A man serves in a platoon , and he serves alongside roughly 32 men . And these 32 men have spouses and children of their own, families that will miss them should they die.

A man throws himself on the grenade and saves say 64 people suffering or even 96 should each of his platoon mates have a wife and a child. We can add even more people to that list should we include parents, siblings, and friends.

The man who dodges the grenade and lets 32 of his friends die in the blast and lives is not committing a selfless act in living to see his family again. He has bought their happiness at the price of 96 or more other people's suffering and sorrow. Such a thing is a selfish act worthy only of condemnation.


You misunderstand me. My point is that selfless is defined by the weight of one's regards for other persons over one's own. So while one may argue that one human life is equivalent to another--that does not necessitate the weight of one's intent is equivalent to another.

If a man holds his own desires and wishes at high value but still sacrifices it because he views another man's worth more--is it more selfless than a man who sees his own thoughts and desires as little to nothing and those around him as a little more so?

Think of a man who views himself near nothing but only desires for his name to go down on the positive note of being heroic--is that the same thing as a man that does the same act but does it with the intent of weighing others desires and wishes above his valuable own?

Here's another example: Charity. One man gives because he enjoys feeling like a good person and the reputation it offers him as such, and another offers the same but with the genuine intent of helping other people when comprehending their suffering and pain greater than his own leisure. They may offer the same and the act may be the same--but one weighs more in being selfless because of the weight of their intent.

Indeed, a man that holds his own thoughts and feelings above 32 others would have to be selfish indeed. Rather more human, however, which is why we cherish those acts which are descriptively induced through more selfless intent.

247 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/1/17
I experience nonsense voices, illusions, and everything else someone associates to god or in human terms... I am the most insane.

In my pursuits, I really only figure out to make a language that is really accurate, includes unification of awareness that is constantly shown. I have no deviated from this, while I only became aware I was doing this in an awake state more recently.

Since then, I have been experiencing everything one might associate to insanity. Now I do not ever believe in insanity. That word is more of someone self-defeating instead of believing in themselves. For years now I have been readdressing the way I speak by ceasing to speak. As I do so I have become aware of what I am telling myself with each word and for many years I was feeling each word like a weapon in use against myself as I spoke to define. After recognizing this has been happening because I read human books about selflessness and selfishness, like bibles of various cultures, I knew I had to stop believing in that bullshit. Since I have been correcting stuff I read from others, my experiences of self-attacks have been going away as I figure out to say the stuff I began attempting to say years ago.

No matter anything we do, any individuals is always beyond description. We are that which keeps ourselves here. Being around others is the most difficult thing for us to do. We make reality possible but after making another individual after the first... everything became more and since then we've been figuring out what it is to be around each other.

One must solely know themselves, to do that is to know all since any individual is also all there is. One can refer to themselves as a human, blood cells, or whatever. For me though, I include much more awareness in my own understanding by describing myself as that which makes magic happen or another way... our light/vibrations/energy/consciousness is everything.

Words like selflessness and selfishness began in regards to spiritual figures like brahmans. They were referred to as selfless because they made their own reality and included others. While, anyone that accepts they know what's happening here has to figure out what they begin to talk about once they accept they can talk about it. From there is a constant aligning process to ensure you stay true in your statements no matter the length. Simple statements like we all all there is, is obvious and already know.

So let's try this statement. Words like selfishness and selflessness have been in use repeatedly after their initial creation to discuss individuals. Discussing individuals defines us. Defining us, like heisenberg's principle denies, cannot have any uncertainty. Ending uncertainty is ceasing to buy into schemes that attempt to get you to think about your actions around others instead of recognizing you have always been true. After all, for any individual to understand themselves as something that is all powerful all knowing all all.... all you gotta do is cease believing that someone else can provide you with more than you can for yourself.

Furthermore, if you believe anything I tell you and want to figure yourself out some more... as you let go of words you're going to recognize the word quick doesn't appropriately describe you. We are light and process at light's speed, while still being beyond form, so still more than light. Point is.... the further you get to a complete understanding of yourself the more you catch up to the movement of light and the light you produce. To do this one has to let go of all form... and that includes meaning. I find that I let go after I learn all I wanted to learn after experiencing something. So in regards to selflessness and selfishness, reflection upon yourself in a way that is a true eternal application of your way of understanding these words... well that's godliness and the way you define yourself using any crutches of meaning like words has to result in a completely undefinable definition of yourself....

For example, you are selfless by continuing to live, independent of any pursuits, and not succumbing to the difficulty of being with others than fail to speak equally in a manner that recognizes all individuals are equally capable of the same anyone else can do.
Also, you are selfish by being because we cannot be without prioritizing ourselves... so that word is much garbage that comes with an attempt to put individuals down until you make it your own. Also your ability to channel requires not being down... which is why much of human society has so much stuff putting each other down... keeping individuals down is the greatest massive scale attack on consciousness meant to prevent anyone from self-discovery.
mxdan 
10840 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 3/1/17 , edited 3/1/17
To be a biological entity is to be selfish. To be selfless is to stave your instinct.

Selfless people are more then just animals. They are taking part in something that is more then the sum of it's parts. They are a case for 'humanity' as an ideal. They are the proof that there are variables that are more then just self. If I had to put it into words; To be selfless is to have true value beyond myopic self preservation. But then again, what is value when it comes down to it. To me, true value exists outside of the self but to others that isn't the case. Then again, to be completely selfless is to deny your sense of self and thus not exist at all. It's a strange dynamic.
Posted 3/1/17
Very few people are truly selfless (I don't think I've met any selfless people in my life). I think most people are selfish and do good things to make them feel better about themselves. However, I think we can keep tainted motives in check as long as we're self aware of our own selfishness. That way, we can keep doing good things that have selfish motivations while avoiding doing bad things with selfish motivations. It comes down to how much self restraint you have.
drbock 
23007 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Poland
Offline
Posted 3/1/17

mxdan wrote:

To be a biological entity is to be selfish. To be selfless is to stave your instinct.

Selfless people are more then just animals. They are taking part in something that is more then the sum of it's parts. They are a case for 'humanity' as an ideal. They are the proof that there are variables that are more then just self. If I had to put it into words; To be selfless is to have true value beyond myopic self preservation. But then again, what is value when it comes down to it. To me, true value exists outside of the self but to others that isn't the case. Then again, to be completely selfless is to deny your sense of self and thus not exist at all. It's a strange dynamic.


I do feel conflicted a lot about this - on one side I do value selflessness meant as acting for someone else or for higher value benefit but I dislike the thought of someone acting only for benefit of others. I think also as sacrifice as something very noble but I really hate it at the same time no matter if the sacrifice would be for me or by me.
"To be a biological entity is to be selfish." Nope - think of bees, ants etc. If you are biological entity which is a social animal it is part of your nature and instinct to be selfless, to risk and throw your life away for colony' sake. Also saying that you have no value if you are not selfless just makes me think of... facism or communism where humans are just disposables for greater project. Greater projects are fine but how much sacrifice it would be need to make to diminish oneself to be like cell in living organism - being devoid of self-value and becoming nothing more than a tool... It might be alright and right in some reservation but to become like this completely seems wrong for me. Far from "ideal"

I don't want to make people die for me. I might want to be able to die for others but I don't want to require anyone to die for me. Be able to risk someone's life would be nice but certainly throwing it away? Would I value those who would want to die for me more than those who wouldn't? Perhaps yes, but then isn't it selfish?
mxdan 
10840 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 3/1/17 , edited 3/1/17

drbock wrote:

"To be a biological entity is to be selfish." Nope - think of bees, ants etc.


Wait what? I think you are misinterpreting this. All biological life needs sustenance to survive. Most biological life needs protection to survive. You are arguing that a collective is more important to them than the individual? The reason the collective exists in the first place is the individual. Ultimately, if an ant doesn't eat, it dies. If a plant doesn't take in sun rays and carbon dioxide, it dies. The individual needs a level of selfishness, or else it can't live.

That's what it comes down to.


drbock wrote:

Also saying that you have no value if you are not selfless just makes me think of... facism or communism where humans are just disposables for greater project.

That's not what I am saying at all. If it appeared that way, I apologize. I'm saying that to do something that goes against your very genes. Like jump on a grenade, or starve so your children can eat, or anything that goes beyond self preservation is to take part in something beyond your instincts. It's a beautiful act.


Greater projects are fine but how much sacrifice it would be need to make to diminish oneself to be like cell in living organism - being devoid of self-value and becoming nothing more than a tool... It might be alright and right in some reservation but to become like this completely seems wrong for me. Far from "ideal"

I don't want to make people die for me. I might want to be able to die for others but I don't want to require anyone to die for me. Be able to risk someone's life would be nice but certainly throwing it away? Would I value those who would want to die for me more than those who wouldn't? Perhaps yes, but then isn't it selfish?


Look, I'm not saying you should die. You are inferring that yourself. I'm also not saying we should all pick up our things and be communist. Also something you are inferring yourself.

I'm romanticizing the proportion of sacrifice over urge and saying it is a beautiful thing when it happens.

Take from that what you will but don't make me out to be something I'm not.


First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.