So...acts that are controversially selfish.

[old.Tohtori]

I can't remember if this has been talked about, but ah what the hell. This idea was sparked by one line(Lamp i think? Have toc check.) in the other thread about dying for religion being selfish.

I'm talking about acts that people do, that cause a lot of controversy and at very least, discussion, and sometimes anger in people, when they are mentioned as "selfish acts". This is not a "i want a flame war" thread, it's simply a curious and rather interesting effect i've noticed.

There are two real big ones that always cause a little bit of "talk" among people:

First, funerals. Sure, it's a group-selfish act, but still. These are not at all in the interest of the one put in the hole. Well, they are in the "interest", but they are, at the basis of it, selfish as they are there for the ones left behind. Remember, we're talking about things that arn't normally called selfish, and of things that people might find bad to be called selfish.

The other, the big one and biggest i've thought this far, is having children. Again, selfish for the couple.

There is nothing unselfish in making a child(not to be mistaken with raising one), if you think about it really. the best unselfish reason i've heard, so far, is that "i want to give my companion a child". Which is rather silly, if you're claiming you don't want it for yourself as well.

I really want peoples opinions on these, not a flamewar and namecalling, just curious on peoples opinions and if i've missed some point in these that might be unselfish as such.

 

[Lamp]

I think its important to separate two issues here.
(1) Selfishness - from the perspective of the acutal people we're talking about; and
(2) Cynicism - from the people commenting about such people.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Oh i'm not meaning this as a cynical way, nor would i call someone selfish for a funeral or having a kid, just that in a purely, how to put it...alien perspective?, there's no real unselfish thing there.

I know, it's a bit of a "huh" subject, and i didn't think it'd start without a hickup.

 

[Huntingtons]

what isnt an act of selfishness?

 

[old.Tohtori]

what isnt an act of selfishness?

Do true, everything we do is selfish as such(although some exeptions are), and even the biggest of unselfish acts are most likely to make us feel good.

I'm more meaning to talk about acts, that people wouldn't call selfish(out of respect or somenot), even if they, in all "technical way", are and don't have unselfish qualities as such.

 

[Lamp]

Not correct.

Acts of altruism by definition are unselfish. To class an altruistic action as selfish is cynical. See where I'm getting at ? An unselfish act - like the love a mother has for her baby - that's not selfish. She's not loving the baby because she wants to feel good.

I really do think you are confusing your own cynicism with whats being discussed here.

 

[Lamp]

Actually, what IS being discussed here ? I'm not really sure what you're getting at Toto, to be honest. Its all a bit, well, nebulous.

 

[Lamp]

what isnt an act of selfishness?

Love and compassion

 

[Olgaline]

wouldnt love and compassion be selfish under this set of definitions ?
the emotion at least ?

as a concept tho' i can see how they could be deemed "unselfish"

 

[Lamp]

Well this set of definition is flawed as its based on cynicism. You might as well call black, white, and white black then.

 

[Levin]

A few more examples...

A kind car driver stops to let an old lady cross the road.
He just stops because he doesn't want to risk running over the old hag and go through all the trouble with police, or possibly face jail.

A gentleman holds the door open for someone coming after him.
He just hopes some pretty lady will be watching and be impressed, and that later he'll be able to score with her. If the person he's helping is a pretty lady herself it's even more obvious!

Some kind people travel, using only their own money, to foreign countries to help as aid workers, helping the poor and sick.
They just want to be able to think they're better than others. And of course it's a failsafe pickup topic.

Some people think this way of thinking is cynic. I agree with them. The question is; is it always wrong to be somewhat cynic? Some people might actually have other motives for their "selfless" acts. It's always good to have more than one perspective on things, as long as you can make a well grounded judgement in the end.

I think that most of the time these acts are just reflexive acts that people do without thinking much. They just do what feels "right" to them, just like a stream of water always takes the easiest course down the mountain even if it doesn't mean a straight line. It probably has a lot to do with how they were brought up by their parents.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Not correct.

I really do think you are confusing your own cynicism with whats being discussed here.

I said, firstly, "although some exceptions are".

Second, love and compassion are not ACTS, they are emotions.

You're not getting what's being talked here, 'cause you're too busy trying to overanalyze and locker things, like calling me a cynic when infact i'm not. Or just trying to put your personal spin on it all by reading only some things, and seeing other things between the lines, when there is none.

I'm just discussing a matter that is not usually done by people, but what is interesting enough, when watched from a neutral standpoint.

Levin you got some excellent ones right there, never even thought of those

 

[Rookiescot]

Damn I wish I hadnt drank so much beer over the years ..... that way I might have a fucking clue as to whats being discused here.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Damn I wish I hadnt drank so much beer over the years ..... that way I might have a fucking clue as to whats being discused here.

It's really simple if you read and don't try to read between the lines.

Also if you look at it from a neutral, outsider kind of way.

 

[Rookiescot]

Ah so an example might be a person who uses a big 4x4 for the school run to keep her kids safe but in reality kids who get knocked down by 4x4s have a higher chance of being killed?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Ah so an example might be a person who uses a big 4x4 for the school run to keep her kids safe but in reality kids who get knocked down by 4x4s have a higher chance of being killed?

Ah that's a bit different, but in a similar ballpark.

That would be perfect for..hmm...a...."un-thought out acts of safety"?

Now if you'd take your example into the terms of this thread, be it simpele enough or not:

People who use 4x4 to keep their kids safe are doing it so they don't lose their kids.

But that's a bit too much into the cynical way of thinking.