dclxvinoise

I was just having a debate about this with a friend and thought it would be an interesting discussion to have here. Do you believe that true altruism exists or do you think that it is unrealistic?
Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a purely selfless act because in the end we are always our own motivator. There may be other outside factors involved in motivating us, which would imply that there are varying degrees of selfishness and that acts like giving to charity or helping others would be far less selfish than manipulating someone or stealing something for yourself.

Gabby

I voted no because I watched (and participated) in this same debate years ago on a different debate board and I'll just say, it went on for DAYS and it went really BAD at one point. But in the end, I couldn't argue against the ultimate selfishness in every act.

Iriemon

If you define any voluntary act as being selfish because the actor made the decision to do it, then by definition there is no purely selfless act. However, why cannot a person make a decision to do an act that is based on purely selfless reasons?

__________________
Matthew 5:9

dclxvinoise

What reasons would those be? They are based on the person's viewpoint and their motivation to do the act would still make it a selfish act. I think the term selfish gets a bad rap and has been given an automatically negative connotation. I think, by our very nature, we are selfish creatures. I don't think there's anything wrong with that either. I just think we should be honest about it.

Iriemon

How so? Guy jumps on a hand grenade to save his buddies' lives. That is a selfish act because ipso facto he decided to do it?

Cephus

Even the guy who jumps on a grenade may achieve something from their act, either because they think they'll be considered a hero or because they're trying to kiss up to an imaginary god, etc. Even if it's just personal satisfaction, that's something they take from it and therefore, it is not a completely selfless act.

__________________
I'm not anti-religion, I'm anti-hypocrisy.

Blog me! http://BitchSpot.JadeDragonOnline.com

dclxvinoise

No, it's selfish because he did it based on his feelings and care for his buddy. Like I said in the original post, there are varying degrees of selfishness. Selfish acts aren't necessarily bad.

Iriemon

That was the point I made. Sacrificing one's only life for others can only be deemed selfish if you say ipso facto say that because he decided to do it it must be selfish.

If that is the definition you start with a priori, then by definition every act is selfish and there is no debate.

If you do not start with the condition that one's voluntary act are by definition selfish because he made the decision to act, then it's hard for me to see how a decision to sacrifice your life for others is necessarily a selfish act.

Iriemon

There have certainly been instances were people have sacrificed themselves for strangers and where they were not religious.

faminedynasty

As always happens in these debates (usually when the grenade issue is raised) you have stretched the definition of selfishness far beyond the common conceptual understanding of the term. His supposed selfishness is based on HIS care for OTHERS and is selfish simply because it is his. But in fact his concern was for others, their safety and well-being and was therefore not all about him. And I don't think that fits a fair definition of selfishness, nor the conceptual understanding of the common, sensible man.

__________________
"We may have destroyed this country, but we got rich doing it!" --The GOP
There is a special place in hell for those who care only about themselves.