Originally posted by FreakyKBH
When the actor is behaving in a manner in which others or, even, his own rational[hidden]at least as others would call rational[/hidden] self would call the opposite of beneficial for the actor, he is doing so on the basis of belief that some greater value is being obtained.

Usually, that is the case. And that, in some circumstances, is called altruism. It is not, what I would call 'acting according to their own self-interest'.
But one must not forget that many of our actions do not involve much calculation of benefit at all but are driven by instincts.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Usually, that is the case. And that, in some circumstances, is called altruism. It is not, what I would call 'acting according to their own self-interest'.
But one must not forget that many of our actions do not involve much calculation of benefit at all but are driven by instincts.

It's 100% always to our mind's thinking about what is best for us--- even at the cost of our own lives.
The market never closes, and we are the constant traders.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
It's 100% always to our mind's thinking about what is best for us-
.

If what you mean by "us" above is one self i.e. not other people other than yourself, that's obviously simply not true. Unless you are a true psychopath, it's an empirical fact it isn't true.
If what you mean by "us" above can be other people other than yourself, when it is for other people, we call that "altruism" .

-- even at the cost of our own lives.

If what you mean by "us" is one self, depending on circumstances, that's usually a contradiction.
I would say, rather than running, throwing yourself onto a grenade to save some complete strangers is most certainly NOT in your interest!!!

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
It's 100% always to our mind's thinking about what is best for us--- even at the cost of our own lives.

Sure, if 'what is best for us' is defined as 'what we choose to do'. But that's stupid word games, nothing more.

Originally posted by humy
If what you mean by "us" above is one self i.e. not other people other than yourself, that's obviously simply not true. Unless you are a true psychopath, it's an empirical fact it isn't true.
If what you mean by "us" above can be other people other than yourself, when it is for other people, we call that "altruism" .
[quote] -- even at the cost of our own liv ...[text shortened]... ourself onto a grenade to save some complete strangers is most certainly NOT in your interest!!!

Still missing the key ingredient.
Let's inspect the grenade jumper.
Among the myriad reasons a person would or could perform such an act, what could be considered the altruistic reason is the calculation executed by said jumper, i.e., a desire to protect others involved.
Were he surrounded by enemy combatants, the strategic play would be to allow the grenade to go off with max casualties... including himself.
In his own camp, the strategy shifts to motivated loss: how does he minimize damage?

Regardless the situation, whether children or puppies are involved or not, the actor receives a benefit with an arc line of acceptable loss correspondent to his perceived gain.

Originally posted by caissad4
My OTB rating is 2045. It has been as high as 2159.
My USCF id is 11106111. (Number 2 in the over 60 crowd (womens) in the US)
For a long time I played 700 to 800 games at a time but now my gameload is under 100.
I also have several databases now.

You mean 700 games at a time HERE? Krist, how would you do anything else? Seems a full time job just to get that many done in a day. I figured you had to be expert at least. Do you still play OTB? What state do you live in, I assume somewhere in the US? I won't pull an HOH on you if you PM me. HOH did me dirty when I mentioned my amateur radio call sign, he used that to find my real name, address and such and posted a picture of my house gotten from Google. Russ pulled the post fortunately and HOH was PROUD of it, saying I was stupid ever putting personal info here. The stupid part on my part was thinking people here were nice.

I guess the d4 part indicates you like that opening a lot, eh.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
the actor receives a benefit with an arc line of acceptable loss correspondent to his perceived gain.

"benefit" and "perceived gain" to who? NOT to himself but OTHERS. That is what we call 'altruism'.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
"Without thinking."

You sure?

I was there and you were not. You are a back seat driver thinking you have a civilzation changing mind (your own words) and therefore can render judgement of human motivations.

In the case of me V the truck, there was no time between seeing fuel flowing and the dude stuck inside and me climbing up the side of the truck. The only thing I thought was how frigging big the truck was lying on its side. That was it. My goal was to free the stuck driver and that was it nothing more.

Originally posted by humy
"benefit" and "perceived gain" to who? NOT to himself but OTHERS. That is what we call 'altruism'.

The actor receives some measure of benefit, period/full-stop.
He sees a benefit which outweighs even the basic want of life.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The actor receives some measure of benefit, period/full-stop.
He sees a benefit which outweighs even the basic want of life.

You keep referring to events that have some time pass. In my case there was for all intents and purposes zero time between me seeing the fuel flow and the guy stuck inside to start acting, there was no altruism judgement but of course in your conspiracy laden mind EVERYTHING has to conform to your prejudged thinking.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The actor receives some measure of benefit,
.

how someone throwing himself on a grenade to save others 'benefit' himself?

He sees a benefit which outweighs even the basic want of life

Yes, "benefit" to OTHER people, NOT himself. We all call that 'altruism'.

Originally posted by humy
how someone throwing himself on a grenade to save others 'benefit' himself?

He sees a benefit which outweighs even the basic want of life

Yes, "benefit" to OTHER people, NOT himself. We all call that 'altruism'.

What possible value could he value more than life?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
What possible value could he value more than life?

WHO's life? If he values other peoples lives other than himself then we call that 'compassion'. Compassion isn't a selfish motive.

Originally posted by humy
WHO's life? If he values other peoples lives other than himself then we call that 'compassion'. Compassion isn't a selfish motive.

If he values others more than himself, then there is no question at all and he is merely discharging of his pre-assigned value system, i.e., his life has less value than other's life and it is presumed he will sacrifice his own for theirs.

I submit that he values something more than his own life which is represented by his action, and although the by-product is their survival, he is saying something more important about how he considers people ought to live.
He couldn't live with himself if he did not act in accordance to value system, but instead, he can act with a clear conscience in giving up his life knowing he is acting in accord with truth.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
If he values others more than himself, then there is no question at all and he is merely discharging of his pre-assigned value system, i.e., his life has less value than other's life and it is presumed he will sacrifice his own for theirs.

I submit that he values something more than his own life which is represented by his action, and although the by-p ...[text shortened]... can act with a clear conscience in giving up his life knowing he is acting in accord with truth.

In other words, he is being selfless and altruistic.
I thought you were saying nobody can do that?