Agreed. But what if a person (the SEAL) values other's good over his own? What then?

That is the simple idea behind altruism and selflessness, as traditionally defined, not a lack of choice in the matter (which is actually necessary for altruism). Yes, he is still choosing to act according to his own values, but to classify this under the understood definition of selfish just seems absurd to me. The idea behind altruism or self-lessness is not that a person didn't choose to act on the behalf of someone else. On the contrary, it is the act of choice that makes a person able to act selflessly.

I think that kennethamy is on the right track by simply pointing to standard definitions and noting that they are not self-contradictory, and that we have a history full of demonstrations of actions that fit those definitions.

I guess I can still see how a person could classify "acting according to personal value" as selfish, but then they are not talking about the same topic ussually associated with the words selfish, selfless, altruism, etc. And personally I don't think the first idea even directly relates to those topics. Maybe a few new words or a different way of talking about the subject could be developed to help sort out the confusion. I think that once it was clearly defined in a way that doesn't confuse non-relating ideas, we'd probably not have much to debate.

Until that time, this could probably go on forever.

I agree, since that is just a truism if understood vaguely enough. But how does it follow that every one is an egoist from that? Unless, of course, you just define being an egoist as being motivated by one's own values and ends. A psychological egoist is someone who is motivated only by satisfying his own interests without any regard for the interests of others.

See:

Egoism [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

I guess I can still see how a person could classify "acting according to personal value" as selfish, but then they are not talking about the same topic ussually associated with the words selfish, selfless, altruism, etc. And personally I don't think the first idea even directly relates to those topics. Maybe a few new words or a different way of talking about the subject could be developed to help sort out the confusion. I think that once it was clearly defined in a way that doesn't confuse non-relating ideas, we'd probably not have much to debate.

Until that time, this could probably go on forever.

Thanks for clarifying, and you guessed right that I've only been reading pieces of the thread... So am I right in assuming that the debate here has more to do with the assumtions that come before any discussion of selfishness and altruism can begin?

Neitherextreme,


:)The self modivated by its understanding and values acts, and in acting to effect those beliefs and values the self reaffirms itself. The action comes out of the selfs intent, the action is intended to reaffirm its values. This problem has been one of symantics, symantics forever.:p

Then long live semantics! :p

As long as we separate the ideas of "self-interested" and "selfish", such that "selfless" can still be a meaning full expression, then I think I'd be satisfied.

NeitherExtreme,

:)Self-interest is what makes the action selfish

How can that be? If I go to sleep at night because I am tired, I do that in my self-interest. But how is that action selfish?
Why must an action be selfless in order not to be selfish? Those are just two extremes. Aren't there actions which are not either selfless nor selfish? Like my eating vanilla ice-cream?

boagie wrote:

NeitherExtreme,

:)Self-interest is what makes the action selfish

How can that be? If I go to sleep at night because I am tired, I do that in my self-interest. But how is that action selfish?
Why must an action be selfless in order not to be selfish? Those are just two extremes. Aren't there actions which are not either selfless nor selfish? Like my eating vanilla ice-cream?

kennethamy,

A self-interested action, which all action is, is of necessity first selfish/self-interested before accomplishing anything else, the subjects investment is in performing his intent through said action.

kennethamy,

A self-interested action, which all action is, is of necessity first selfish/self-interested before accomplishing anything else, the subjects investment is in performing his intent through said action.

Boagie

Just had to throw myself in here, I've read parts of this thread earlier but haven't fealt like speaking up cause of the fact that it's just to much already..

But I agree with you that all actions (or almost atleast) is selfish just because you won't do the action if you didn't have a personal interest in doing that action.

But that example of some cop reaching out to somebody trying to commit suicide and not letting go and him later saying that he couldn't live with himself a day after that if he had let go is still selfish to me when he even said that it was because he wouldn't be able to live with himself if he did let go. But note: I don't view 'selfish' as a bad word as most people seem to do, I see it as truth and nothing els..

As you said in another thread Boagie, we seem to think alot alike

*Edit
and isn't selfish and self-interest pretty much the same thing? I belive it is anyways...

kennethamy wrote:

kennethamy,

A self-interested action, which all action is, is of necessity first selfish/self-interested before accomplishing anything else, the subjects investment is in performing his intent through said action.

But why is it selfish if it affects no one else. Suppose I brush a bit of lint off my sleeve, because I don't like the look of it on my sleeve. It affected no one else. So how is it selfish?

If I "perform my intent" perhaps I am doing something that is self-interested (and not necessarily that, since I might be mistaken and the action might be contrary to my interest) but if it affect no one but myself, why is it selfish? (Unless, of course, you define a self-interested action as a selfish action. But why should anyone accept such a definition?

But if I go to sleep when I am tired, and my action affects no one else, that action is self-interested. But why is it selfish? What is selfish is self-interested, but what is self-interested is not necessarily selfish. Is it?

Well, I don't know how you would define "selfish" but my definition would be "any action made for your own sake and nobody elses" and "self-interested" should be something like "to have a personal interest in something" and since those two are pretty much the same thing or atleast depending upon eachother for example you can't do a selfish acts without beeing self-interested, but you might question if all self-interested actions are selfish and I would have to answer 'yes' to that due to the fact that when I think of "selfish" it's not something sinister and evil, it's just the fact that the action is made for self-interest and nobody elses and as you wouldn't commit the action if it wheren't for your own gain all actions have to be selfish, don't they?

As I already posted, it may be true that all selfish actions are self-interested actions, but it is not true that all self-interested actions are selfish actions. I think that part of the confusion comes from confusing those two sentences.

You seem to identify selfishness with self-interest. But, let me ask you about the following cases:

A mother has two sons, A and B. She leaves two pieces of cake for them to eat after school.

Case 1. A comes home early and eats both pieces of cake, leaving none for B.
Case 2. A comes home and eats his piece of cake, and leaves the other for B.

In which case would you say that A was doing something selfish, and in which case would you say that A was only doing something only self-interested?

What the word "selfish' means to you, is not the issue. The issue is what the word "selfish" means.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary gives this definition of "selfish".

selfish
Main Entry:Pronunciation: \ˈsel-fish\ Function:adjective Date:1640 1: concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one's own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others2: arising from concern with one's own welfare or advantage in disregard of others <a selfish act>


It seems to me that a person who does something "seeking or concentrating on his own advantage...without regard for others" isn't a nice person. Don't you agree? (The part, "without regard for others" is important).

Ofcourse what it means to me is important in this discussion when what a word is to a person is direcly relevent to how he uses that word as if I where to say that somebody is tall, he might not be tall for you.

But as you said the part "without regard for others" is important and I would like you to lay down your definition on that phrase due to the fact that a action can be selfish (according to me) WITH regard for others, as you don't do the action for anybody els but yourself

Exampel: A girl that you like alot wants you to drive her and some of her girlfirends to a party and pick them up afterwards, and you do it pro bono (with out any direct reward such as cash), then you do it because you want that person to like you (or to get laid), which I think is a selfish action

and as for you example, I think it's selfish in both cases as in case 1 he doesn't care about anybody els and eats both and in case 2 he cares what the others think of him and therefor leaves one... Here's the clear different between our definition of selfish or rather to "without regard for others" as I don't think he had any regard for others in case 2 either, he just wanted them to like him, he didn't leave a piece for person B because he thought person B should get one, he did one because he didn't want to seem selfish which in turn, is selfish. You say that a person have to be evil and careless inorder to be selfish, I just see that as a more direct approach to beeing selfish..

We'll never come to a conclusion in this debate, nevertheless, it's still fun

Of course people can differ about whether an action is selfish or not. But, nevertheless, that doesn't mean that selfishness and self-interest are the same. Just as people can differ on whether A is tall or not but that would not mean that they differ about the meaning of "selfish" and its distinction from "self-interest" would it. They might differ on whether the word applies in this or that case, but not about the meaning of the word. (But can they differ on whether a man who is 7ft tall is tall. Remember, "tall" here means, "tall for a man" and not "tall for a tree")

Of course, before we apply a word to a situation we have to know what all the facts of the case are. We cannot apply the word "tall" to someone, unless we have some way of knowing what he measures; and we cannot know whether someone is being selfish unless we know what he is doing, and how that affects others. That we have to know the facts is a given, of course. But that doesn't mean that the word "selfish" has no clear meaning, and that it is clear that in my example, supposing it is as I described it, the son who grabbed both pieces of cake for himself, at the expense of his brother, was selfish. And the boy who took only his own piece, was self-interested, but not selfish.

I disagree with you that we cannot come to a conclusion about this matter. It seems to me that all we have to do is to clear up all the confusions, and get rid of all the irrelevancies, and we can become quite clear about what selfishness is, and how it differs from self-interest. The discussion is,
I think, fun, only if it is heading somewhere. Otherwise, it is pointless.

Don't you, for instance, agree with me, that the word, "selfish" should not be applied to the boy who took only his own piece of cake, but the word, "self-interest" should; but that "selfish" should be applied to the boy who took both pieces of cake?

If you reply, could you please answer the question I just asked you first. Because, if you object to calling the first boy not selfish, and the second boy selfish, I really would like to know why.

And here's where we differ and I would like to establish this:
A person who have self-interest in an action that person commits, are comitting a selfish action.

That's where I differ... a "self-interested act" (which all actions are according to you) does not have to be "without regard for others". Thus it does not have to be selfish.