Is every action self serving and biased?

[Shagnasty]

@Cosmic Relief

But who does?
How do you know?

I am only admitting this because I need to in this thread. I never told anyone else and I am certainly not a saint.

About two months ago, there was a big car jam on a small two-lane road that I often travel on. I assumed there was an accident but 20 minutes later I saw what the problem was. It was a large snapping turtle trying to cross the road and not doing it very well. It was close to two feet long and much more if you count the tail and head. I HATE, HATE, HATE snapping turtles but I know how to handle most reptiles. I pulled my car over to block both lanes of traffic and picked the nasty thing up and it tried to bite me several times. I carried it over to the pond that it seemed to want to go to and released it.

I got a few claps and lots of thank you’s but I didn’t care about that. If it were a rattlesnake, I would have done the same thing. I don’t see how that wasn’t altruistic or why any of the countless pussies in the traffic didn’t do the same. I didn’t feel all warm and fuzzy about it. I just thought that the snapping turtle should be helped even if it could have bitten off one of my fingers. It is as simple as that.

[santosvega]

I was recently hanging out at the neighborhood pub with my fellow regulars when I found myself in a similar argument with a dyed-in-the-wool objectivist. Now, I had had a few at this point, but according to those present I made a powerful and eloquent argument against the fellow that shut him up for the rest of the evening, much to the joy of the rest of the bar.
Later on in the evening the bartender, after pouring me a few complimentary pints, summed up my drunken yet effective argument with a quote from The Big Lebowski; “You’re not wrong, Walter, you’re just an asshole.”

[mswas]

I give my coins to the Ronald McDonald house every time I eat at McDonald’s, I do it every time because when I was 14 I benefitted from their charity. Since then I have volunteered at Ronald McDonald house as a massage therapist, giving a 15 minute massage to stressed out parents of dying children. It was a great experience for me. I was glad to give something back to something that helped my family once upon a time. But it’s entirely selfish. I give to them for selfish reasons, and why not? Why give to a charity that I have no personal connection to when I have a personal connection to an amazing charity that is completely worthwhile? When you know what it is like to be 14 among people dying of luekemia, and wanting people to feel sorry for you for needing surgery for a potentially fatal, but not certainly fatal genetic disorder, then you can judge my selfish motivations. It is a very queer experience to be 14 with the self-centered ideas of a 14 year old and thinking that at this point in your life you can be selfish because it is YOU who is sick and in the hospital, but you can’t because there are parents with dying children all around you, kids who are REALLY dying, not who are receiving preventative surgery.

I spent a lot of time in hospitals afraid that those I loved were going to die, at 7 years old I spent hours in hospital waiting rooms all by myself with no supervision whatsoever, my only human contact total strangers, so when it was my turn to be sick, I thought it was my turn to receive the full indulgence of those around me, but it wasn’t. My egomaniacal desire to be gratified was mollified by bald and pallid children my own age. I was afraid of my surgery, I was afraid of hospitals but at no point did I fear for my life.

In all of that there is a common theme, my motivations were entirely selfish. And when I give to the Ronald McDonald house, I am entirely selfish because of that connection. My gratitude to that institution is selfish. But I am not confused about it at all. It’s a GOOD thing. Unequivocally, I can say that. People don’t need to worry about rent while their child gets experimental treatments that probably won’t work in a strange city. While the parents live in a foreign environment hoping beyond hope, likely going into deep debt for a long shot, they have a comfortable bed, they have other parents who know what they are going through. They have rooms with video games for their children, they have maid service, and it’s all paid for by people dropping the change from a Big Mac into a coin slot on the countertop, almost certainly for selfish reasons.

[E-Sabbath]

Well.
Wait one second. There is a kind of action that’s not self-serving. The thing is, it’s the arbitrary action. “Do I put the cup on the left counter or the right?” “Do I put this screw here, or an inch over?” “Do I flip this loose bolt eleven times or fourteen?” For all possible purposes, they have the same value for you, so performing either specifically is not self-serving.

Note: I agree entirely that it’s not wrong to be self-serving. I just don’t see any way around it when performing a task that has meaning.

[elbows]

And what of the woman who surrenders a child to adoption? Sentencing herself to a lifetime of heartache, so the child will have a shot at a real family and a better life? She is shamed for what she has done, ‘Giving her child away!’. There is no reward, no payoff, no benefit for the devastated new mother, only pain. And a lifetime of it stretched out before her.

And what of the caregiver? Someone who sacrifices the life they know to take on the care of someone who requires 24/7 attention, adult diapers, daily meds, etc, for years and years? It will only end one way, with the death of the ill relative, an incredibly painful experience for a caregiver to go through. The ill are often not appreciative of the care they receive, sometimes just the opposite. There is no pay, they don’t give out medals. Where is the self serving interest?

[athelas]

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own neccessities but of their advantages.” --Adam Smith

Selfish people can get lots of stuff done. Not all self-interest is zero-sum.

[Frylock]

@mswas

I give my coins to the Ronald McDonald house every time I eat at McDonald’s, I do it every time because when I was 14 I benefitted from their charity. Since then I have volunteered at Ronald McDonald house as a massage therapist, giving a 15 minute massage to stressed out parents of dying children. It was a great experience for me. I was glad to give something back to something that helped my family once upon a time. But it’s entirely selfish. I give to them for selfish reasons, and why not? Why give to a charity that I have no personal connection to when I have a personal connection to an amazing charity that is completely worthwhile? When you know what it is like to be 14 among people dying of luekemia, and wanting people to feel sorry for you for needing surgery for a potentially fatal, but not certainly fatal genetic disorder, then you can judge my selfish motivations. It is a very queer experience to be 14 with the self-centered ideas of a 14 year old and thinking that at this point in your life you can be selfish because it is YOU who is sick and in the hospital, but you can’t because there are parents with dying children all around you, kids who are REALLY dying, not who are receiving preventative surgery.

I spent a lot of time in hospitals afraid that those I loved were going to die, at 7 years old I spent hours in hospital waiting rooms all by myself with no supervision whatsoever, my only human contact total strangers, so when it was my turn to be sick, I thought it was my turn to receive the full indulgence of those around me, but it wasn’t. My egomaniacal desire to be gratified was mollified by bald and pallid children my own age. I was afraid of my surgery, I was afraid of hospitals but at no point did I fear for my life.

In all of that there is a common theme, my motivations were entirely selfish. And when I give to the Ronald McDonald house, I am entirely selfish because of that connection. My gratitude to that institution is selfish. But I am not confused about it at all. It’s a GOOD thing. Unequivocally, I can say that. People don’t need to worry about rent while their child gets experimental treatments that probably won’t work in a strange city. While the parents live in a foreign environment hoping beyond hope, likely going into deep debt for a long shot, they have a comfortable bed, they have other parents who know what they are going through. They have rooms with video games for their children, they have maid service, and it’s all paid for by people dropping the change from a Big Mac into a coin slot on the countertop, almost certainly for selfish reasons.

Above, you state several times that you have selfish motivations for giving to RMcDH, but you never say exactly what those selfish motivations are. What are they?

[Frylock]

Reality check here, guys.

How much sense does it make to say “This person takes pleasure from the act of helping others. How selfish!”?

[E-Sabbath]

Is there a difference between being selfish and being self-serving? I rather think so.

[mswas]

@elbows

And what of the woman who surrenders a child to adoption? Sentencing herself to a lifetime of heartache, so the child will have a shot at a real family and a better life? She is shamed for what she has done, ‘Giving her child away!’. There is no reward, no payoff, no benefit for the devastated new mother, only pain. And a lifetime of it stretched out before her.

She is caring for her genetic legacy by putting it in the hands of someone more suited.

And what of the caregiver? Someone who sacrifices the life they know to take on the care of someone who requires 24/7 attention, adult diapers, daily meds, etc, for years and years? It will only end one way, with the death of the ill relative, an incredibly painful experience for a caregiver to go through. The ill are often not appreciative of the care they receive, sometimes just the opposite. There is no pay, they don’t give out medals. Where is the self serving interest?

Raising a child is a joy in and of itself.

[Mojo_Pin]

@Frylock

Reality check here, guys.

How much sense does it make to say “This person takes pleasure from the act of helping others. How selfish!”?

No need for your reality check, thank you. Maybe you didn’t notice Der Trih’s post at the very top?

edit:

@elbows

And what of the woman who surrenders a child to adoption? Sentencing herself to a lifetime of heartache, so the child will have a shot at a real family and a better life? She is shamed for what she has done, ‘Giving her child away!’. There is no reward, no payoff, no benefit for the devastated new mother, only pain. And a lifetime of it stretched out before her.

And what of the caregiver? Someone who sacrifices the life they know to take on the care of someone who requires 24/7 attention, adult diapers, daily meds, etc, for years and years? It will only end one way, with the death of the ill relative, an incredibly painful experience for a caregiver to go through. The ill are often not appreciative of the care they receive, sometimes just the opposite. There is no pay, they don’t give out medals. Where is the self serving interest?
Reply With Quote

You have a very inaccurate view of why people adopt or give their children away. They do so because after they have weighed all the pros and cons to the best of their ability, they still have a desire to do so, for whatever reasons (like what mswas mentioned, plus many more). Nobody adopts a child if they don’t predict a net happiness increase for themselves.

[truthpizza]

The word selfish (like the phrase “self interest”) is, like all words, defined by the way people use it. If we define it in such a way that everything anyone does voluntarily is always “selfish”, then we might as well omit the word from the language, since saying someone is selfish is true by definition and makes no factual claim.

However the way most people use it is to imply that someone does things with a disregard for the welfare of others. This is a useful description that is certainly true in some cases more than others. To call an action “selfish” is normally a criticism that serves to encourage people to act in a way that is more cooperative and beneficial to the community.

I really dislike Ayn Rand and objectivists who try to promote selfishness as a good thing and altruism as bad. They play a semantic game by using the first definition of selfish to establish it’s legitimacy, but then acting as if that implies it is perfectly OK for people to try to amass huge amount of wealth without regard for the benefit of others.

Selfishness serves a purpose in the market when it provides an incentive for people to provide the best product or service possible at a favorable price. However it is bad if it involves cheating, deception, coercion, ignoring bad side effects like pollution, monopolistic tactics, collusion with cronies or government officials, and so on.

I am happy to consider actions as “unselfish” if they are motivated by caring about other people or enjoying a smile or other favorable reaction from others or simply feeling good about yourself because you did something worthwhile. We need to encourage each other to behave in mutually beneficial ways.

[Frylock]

@Mojo_Pin

No need for your reality check, thank you. Maybe you didn’t notice Der Trih’s post at the very top?

Yes, I noticed his and Sophistry and Illusion made the same point. But people seem to be ignoring them, so I thought I’d put it yet a third way.

[Blaster_Master]

I’m going to take a slightly different perspective on this. Let’s take a simple example and suppose a cause that one gives to and gives one a warm and fuzzy feeling. If you give to them because of the warm and fuzzy feeling and wouldn’t do it if it made you nauseous, then you’re acting selfishly. You’re still doing something charitable, but you’re doing it for the wrong reason. OTOH, if you give to the same cause and would do so even without the warm-fuzzies, or even if it made you feel sick, then you’re acting selflessly, and the warm-fuzzies are just a nice benefit for doing the right thing.

Of course, life isn’t always that clear cut. If my friend had a hard day, even if it makes me uncomfortable to listen, am I listening because I really care, or maybe I’m doing it because I’m hoping the favor will be returned when I need it. Chances are, it’s a little bit of both. I would say, however, there does theoretically exist the possibility of an act of pure altruism, where in every conceivable way the act results in a loss, but those are probably exceedingly rare. As others have point out, even a situation like giving a kidney to a complete stranger, while in most senses is a loss, still has some benefits, even if it’s just warm-fuzzies. Of course, I’d be hard-pressed to come up with an example

I think it really comes down to motivation. You can do the right thing, but if you do it for the wrong reason, it can still be seen as selfish from a certain perspective. For instance, if you give $10 to a charity because it will give you warm-fuzzies, well, there are some people who pay more money for a less gratifying result. However, if you do something for the right reason, even if you leave the deal better off than you entered it, it doesn’t make it self-serving. In fact, as others have said, I’d tend to believe that, more often than not, doing the right thing comes with some sort of small reward, and in that sense, it’s difficult to see those sorts of acts as selfish in any light.

To sum up, my philosophy has always been not to do the right thing because it’s the right thing to do; just do the right thing.

[jakesteele]

As the Cancer Man on the X-Files said, “No act is completely selfless.” Don’t worry you are in good company.

You might try that ‘Pay it forward’ thing. every day,week, month, whatever, do something for someone anonomously and make sure you don’t tell anyone about it. Telling a friend is just a way to stroke your ego about what a selfless person you are.

In other words, don’t take pride in being humble.

[Mojo_Pin]

@Blaster_Master

To sum up, my philosophy has always been not to do the right thing because it’s the right thing to do; just do the right thing.

And I contend that even your philosophy, besides not making much sense, is the way it is specifically because it appeals to your moralities. In other words it pleases you to adopt such a philosophy. I also believe that the very act of decision making is impossible without an awareness of self interest.

I’m going to take a slightly different perspective on this. Let’s take a simple example and suppose a cause that one gives to and gives one a warm and fuzzy feeling. If you give to them because of the warm and fuzzy feeling and wouldn’t do it if it made you nauseous, then you’re acting selfishly. You’re still doing something charitable, but you’re doing it for the wrong reason. OTOH, if you give to the same cause and would do so even without the warm-fuzzies, or even if it made you feel sick, then you’re acting selflessly, and the warm-fuzzies are just a nice benefit for doing the right thing.

This is utterly false. No one gives to charity for any reason other than their self interest, and this isn’t a bad thing at all.
Let me also point out that in your choices of words such as “the right thing” and “the wrong reason” show your flawed thinking. You have already assigned “charitable” “altruistic” acts a certain value and see the word “selfish” as mutually exclusive with the Good Thing that is charity.

edit:

@Frylock

Yes, I noticed his and Sophistry and Illusion made the same point. But people seem to be ignoring them, so I thought I’d put it yet a third way.

Ah ok

[smiling_bandit]

@Mojo_Pin

This is utterly false. No one gives to charity for any reason other than their self interest, and this isn’t a bad thing at all.

I can personally attest that this is wrong. I gain nothing from the charities I give to, have little reason to give, and don’t particularly feel good about it, or bad if I don’t. I am not recognized for it and no one would notice if I don’t. I choose to give to people. You are making an assumption, and your only response to me can be that you simply don’t believe me.

But, of course, if you simply refuse to believe me when it suits you, then there is no reason for you to even post in the thread. Your mind is made up, and no evidence could persuade you.

Second, of course, is the fact that even if it did make you feel good to do things for others, this doesn’t mean it is wrong. A feeling may be ordinate, or not, with what is really good, which we may discover using our inborn knowledge of good and human reason.

[sleestak]

@truthpizza

I really dislike Ayn Rand and objectivists who try to promote selfishness as a good thing and altruism as bad. They play a semantic game by using the first definition of selfish to establish it’s legitimacy, but then acting as if that implies it is perfectly OK for people to try to amass huge amount of wealth without regard for the benefit of others.

Selfishness serves a purpose in the market when it provides an incentive for people to provide the best product or service possible at a favorable price. However it is bad if it involves cheating, deception, coercion, ignoring bad side effects like pollution, monopolistic tactics, collusion with cronies or government officials, and so on.

I really dislike it when people on message boards post an attack on a philosophy when they obviously either do not understand it or purposely mangle it. If you read Rand you’ll find that she is against ‘cheating, deception, coercion, ignoring bad side effects like pollution, monopolistic tactics, collusion with cronies or government officials, and so on.’. By her own philosophy, lying, cheating and deception* are immoral actions. Objectivism is based on rational self-interest, though it seems that everyone who dislikes Rand (and man, there are a bunch of people who hate her) ignores the ‘rational’ part and run on about the self-interest part. Lying, cheating, deception, polluting, etc are not rational and therefore, according to Rand, are not moral actions.

On a side note, how can one amass a huge fortune without benefiting others in some way**?

Slee

*There are exceptions to this, for example lying to a thief.
** Ignoring,of course, the people who Rand would find to be acting immorally.Thieves, con-men, politicians,etc

[Mojo_Pin]

@smiling_bandit

I can personally attest that this is wrong. I gain nothing from the charities I give to, have little reason to give, and don’t particularly feel good about it, or bad if I don’t. I am not recognized for it and no one would notice if I don’t. I choose to give to people. You are making an assumption, and your only response to me can be that you simply don’t believe me.

But, of course, if you simply refuse to believe me when it suits you, then there is no reason for you to even post in the thread. Your mind is made up, and no evidence could persuade you.

Second, of course, is the fact that even if it did make you feel good to do things for others, this doesn’t mean it is wrong. A feeling may be ordinate, or not, with what is really good, which we may discover using our inborn knowledge of good and human reason.

Ok I was rash and presumptuous, so lets take a step back. Is choice, any choice, possible without self interest? I believe that it isn’t. You say that you don’t feel particularly good or bad about giving, that noone would recognize or care either way, and you have little reason to give. And yet you do it. My response is that those things (immediate and obvious gratification, recognition) are not the only reasons one would choose to give to charity, and you are just moved by less obvious reasons (I could make alot of guesses). Some aspect of the act appeals to you, and therefore you do it. Decisions literally cannot be made another way.

[Sophistry_and_Illusion]

@Mojo_Pin

Some aspect of the act appeals to you, and therefore you do it. Decisions literally cannot be made another way.

Of course some aspect of the act appeals to him. But how does that make the act selfish? As has been noted, if you define selfishness broadly enough, every action is selfish; but a broad definition simply isn’t plausible. If it appeals to me to sacrifice my well-being for the sake of another, then that shows I have a generous nature. If it appeals to me to advance my self-interest at any cost to others, then that shows I have a selfish nature. What actions we find appealing reveals our nature.