Originally posted by broblutoI have a suspicion that, once the inaccurate terminology is stripped away, you will be left with something like "people make choices based on their own values", a much less controversial statement.
I never said it was an easy concept to grasp. and you're right, I'm probably using the wrong terminology, but I haven't found a better term yet.
Who said I am a non-theist? I don't know what I am, I have my own thoughts on things and they are subject to change (although I'm finding it harder and harder to find reasons to change what I think). What -ist am I?
I'll wait until you have refined your terminology before discussing this further.
1 edit
Originally posted by SwissGambitI have long tended to agree with him. More recently I have come to see that both his side and yours says pretty much the same thing. The disagreement is in the precise meanings of words.
He's making a much stronger claim than that. He claims that [b]all instances of choosing death are motivated [at least in part] by self-interest.[/b]
Let us suppose that a man is pointing a gun at my (hypothetical) daughter. He has one bullet and plans to shoot her. My daughter is a brilliant and noble human being who I love dearly. She contributes far more to the world than I ever have and will live a long, healthy life if not shot. I leap in front of the bullet. She's my daughter; a woman; someone who does more good in the world than I do, and has more life left to do good in; etc. In short, it's the right thing to do to save her.
Why do I do the right thing to do? Because it's important to me. What does that mean? It means I find it rewarding to do the right thing, and unpleasant if I should do the wrong thing.
The one side seems to look at what it means to care; the other side seems to look at what it is an individual cares about. In the one case, we're all selfish all the time, because we each do what we are motivated to do. In the other, we're not, because we might be motivated by "non-selfish" things like what we think is the right thing to do.
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWell, yes, the heart of the disagreement is the meaning of words like "selfish" and "self-interest".
I have long tended to agree with him. More recently I have come to see that both his side and yours says pretty much the same thing. The disagreement is in the precise meanings of words.
Let us suppose that a man is pointing a gun at my (hypothetical) daughter. He has one bullet and plans to shoot her. My daughter is a brilliant and noble human be motivated by "non-selfish" things like what we think is the right thing to do.
In the case of your [hypothetical] daughter, you have no idea if your action will really save her. The man with the gun could easily shoot her after he shoots you. Nevertheless, your concern for her was so strong that you did everything in your power to stop her from being shot. This is a total abrogation of self-interest. Self-interest is defined as a concern for one's own advantage and well-being; taking a bullet in the chest is completely at odds with this. [I realize you may not entirely disagree with this.]
It is even possible that it all happens so fast that you act on instinct, without any deliberation at all.
In the one case, we're all selfish all the time, because we each do what we are motivated to do.
We can be motivated to help others. Actions that show regard for others cannot, by definition, be called selfish.
I'm in complete agreement with the last sentence of your post, of course.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIs the right thing to do, not in some way self-serving? How is it not? To do what you believe is right makes you feel righteous and strong. To do what you believe is wrong makes you feel shameful and weak. Which one of these is closer to your own personal happiness?
I have long tended to agree with him. More recently I have come to see that both his side and yours says pretty much the same thing. The disagreement is in the precise meanings of words.
Let us suppose that a man is pointing a gun at my (hypothetical) daughter. He has one bullet and plans to shoot her. My daughter is a brilliant and noble human ...[text shortened]... be motivated by "non-selfish" things like what we think is the right thing to do.
Originally posted by broblutohttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/self-serving
Is the right thing to do, not in some way self-serving? How is it not? To do what you believe is right makes you feel righteous and strong. To do what you believe is wrong makes you feel shameful and weak. Which one of these is closer to your own personal happiness?
self-serving: serving one's own interests often in disregard of the truth or the interests of others
It's amazing how you insist on using incorrect terminology in your argument even after it has been pointed out to you. You don't even know what you really want to say, yet that fact doesn't slow you down for a minute. Wow.
Originally posted by SwissGambitActually, in my example, it is used correctly. it just so happens that the choice may show regard for another, but the motives are still self-serving.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/self-serving
self-serving: serving one's own interests often in disregard of the truth or the interests of others
It's amazing how you insist on using incorrect terminology in your argument even after it has been pointed out to you. You don't even know what you really want to say, yet that fact doesn't slow you down for a minute. Wow.
Originally posted by broblutoUnless I make a decision against my will, then any decision I make is according to my will. In that sense it is self serving. However, it does not in any way mean that the decision will benefit me or that I think it will benefit me. It is painfully obvious that your initial claim that all my decisions are intended to make me happy. Your new version of 'self serving' is along the lines of 'all my decisions are intended to benefit me.' Again, such a claim is fatally flawed.
Actually, in my example, it is used correctly. it just so happens that the choice may show regard for another, but the motives are still self-serving.
Originally posted by Green PaladinTHANK YOU! I honestly never heard of that term before but it explains my view perfectly. I read it briefly and scanned over the criticisms of it, which I think I have already conceded in this thread.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_egoism
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadAs Green Paladin indicates via wikipedia, it is not fatally flawed. It is non-falsifiable.
Unless I make a decision against my will, then any decision I make is according to my will. In that sense it is self serving. However, it does not in any way mean that the decision will benefit me or that I think it will benefit me. It is painfully obvious that your initial claim that all my decisions are intended to make me happy. Your new version of 'se nes of 'all my decisions are intended to benefit me.' Again, such a claim is fatally flawed.
I guess that means, that I may not be able to prove it, but you won't be able to disprove it either, which I already said previously.
Originally posted by broblutoYou have no point.
you said it yourself: "often" not "always" ...thanks for proving my point.
By deliberately using the term 'self-serving' with a meaning you know is very uncommon, all you do is confuse people. Have fun explaining what you really mean to every new person who joins the thread.