Noone,

The point is that it is all inclusive, you cannot pick up a glass of water off the counter without being motivated to do so, perhaps your thirsty. The action of picking up the glass and bringing it to your mouth, fulfills your will your desire to do so, it is then said to be selfish, because it is selfserving. Remember that ALL actions are motivated actions--you just cannot get away from that, the action serves that motivation/your will.

But you have not explained why it follows from an action being motivated, that the action is selfish. Of course, all actions are motivated. It would not be an action unless it was motivated. That's just an empty truism. But motivations are of different kinds. I may be motivated to grab your slice of cake. That's selfish because I am depriving you of something you are entitled too, and taking something at your expense. But, suppose I am motivated to give you my own piece of cake because I feel generous. Am I then motivated by selfishness? Of course not. It is just not true that motivation = selfishness. And you cannot make it true by so defining it.

Kennethamy,

First let me ask you this, do you acknowledge that there are two different types of concepts here, one of the moral judgement of the act, in the past tense generally. The other is the concept of cognitive function, generally proceeding any action. If you do see this difference, perhaps, we have something to talk about, if not, it would just be an excercise in futility.

I don't know what you have in mind. But, suppose you tell me why an act motivated by generosity is a selfish act. Surely, it cannot be just because the agent wants to be generous. Why should wanting to be generous make the act selfish? Unless you define all acts an agent wants to do as selfish. But why should that peculiar use of the word "selfish" be accepted? By the way, the term "selfish" does express a moral judgment. How could it not. You don't believe you are complimenting anyone by calling him "selfish", do you?

suppose you tell me why an act motivated by generosity is a selfish act.

Surely it is obvious - all action (supposedly) is governed by the self, so any action provides some kind of satisfaction/satiation for the self.

kennethamy,

Throw your dictionary away kennethamy and try to play this game by ear. If you do not acknowledge the existence of two different types of concepts here, there is nothing to talk about, your just going to babble the same old dictionary defination at me--------no thanks!!

kennethamy the point is, with acknowledgement of both concepts both concepts can be right about the same action at the same time. If you cannot grasp the fact that we are dealing with two different concepts, well, then there is no limit to the endless confusion.

There are none so blind as thoughs who will not see.

Now that's an objection for you. "Those".

kennethamy,

I stand corrected, but, you do not, and apparently cannot. Two concepts kennethamy, two sides to the conflict, all you have to do is give some consideration to the other concept, the other side of the conflict.:rolleyes: It really is apples and oranges kennethamy. Stay focused kennethamy, remember attack the idea, not the messenger.:cool:

Besides which, it is not true that every time I perform an action, I want to do that action. I sometimes perform actions I do not want to do. I do not want to go to a dentist to have my tooth pulled, but I do it anyway. I do it unwillingly.

kennethamy,



"All actions, no matter how generous, selfless or compassion-filled have, in fact, at their basis a motivated self-interest. This is what I took this thread to be concerned with." Khethil quote

If I may interject, there exists at least the possibility I might be able to shed some light for you K. If you'll indulge me, try looking at this concept in the following light: Yes, by definition the word 'selfish' does indeed refer to the 'without regard for others'-sentiment that you brought up.

But that's not the point, and there is no insight to be gained by adhering to this. So let's use another word/term, shall we? How about we say "self-interest". Let's rephrase the issue with the following: All actions, no matter how generous, selfless or compassion-filled have, in fact, at their basis a motivated self-interest. This is what I took this thread to be concerned with.

If you are so inclined as to accept this question as the intent of the discussion, then perhaps some insight might be gained from its assimilation. I personally found it an enlightening concept to accept - once I'd thought it through - that for everything I do, no matter what I *think* my motivation is, there is a self-interest I have in doing it (its important to now that the acknowledgment of this does *not* devalue the generous act one iota). Even if its just the warm-fuzzy I receive or the feeling of empathetic fulfillment these - consciously or subconsciously - this lies in state as the basis for such actions. This may be obvious, but its implications (and personal insight into what we do) are not. It is in these implications of its realization where the value lays.

In any case, with feet firmly planted we can often maintain our positions with a staunch pride; however, bending the mind to fit the 'jist' of what someone's trying to communicate will always net you more insight and wisdom than an adversarial hard line that picks at typos.

... hoping this helps.

Yes. I wonder why he says that. It seems clearly untrue. For instance, it is not in my self-interest give anonymously to a charity. Or for a Navy Seal to kill himself to save his comrades.

kennethamy,

Your talking again of the moral judgement after the fact and indeed may be quite correct, what you not getting is the other concept, the cognitive process which delivered the action of sacrifice. Let the moral judgement stand, and deal with the mental process behind the action. It is in this, that for ever and a day, action is the fulfilment of the will of the subject, thus self-serving. There are not two concepts here for you though are there, suffice to say, considering moral judgement only, you are correct. You are never going to see and/or acknowledge the presence of another concept, so give it a rest, you have never dealt with this topic from the begining, that is why it goes round and round for you kennethamy. MORALLY SPEAKING KENNETHAMY YOU ARE CORRECT------CORRECT, but, moral judgement was never the topic-- I know you do not understand this, but what more is there for you to gain, I state clearly, that as a moral judgement, the sacrifice of the navy seal is a selfless act. That should be a wrap for you.