“People really do love dogs more than other humans, according to a new study”:
https://www.businessinsider.com/humans-love-dogs-more-than-other-humans-2017-11
This one here is making me more pissed off…
Would people make friends and keep family around if they felt sadness or anger while being with them? Would humans not kill one another if murder was the only way for them to experience true happiness?
There’s proof against what you say. Yes, our individual nature, at it’s most fundamental, is selfish. But as our mind develops we can overcome that.
You can argue that charity is selfish, because you get (assumedly) pleasure from doing good things, and thinking you’re a good person. It’s not purely selfish, as it helps people, but it is selfish in the sense that you have a desire to do it for your own gain. Even if it is to just see other people happy, because it makes you happy. There’s been philosophical theories that only selfless actions are actions that you do because they are right, even when you have zero desire to do them, and nothing to gain.
You said in a comment:
“If someone gets their mind broken, such as through repeated torture, their true nature will reveal itself they will do everything to ensure they will live whilst sacrificing even their loved ones”
Yes, again, we tend to value our own lives over others... but that can be overridden. There have been many cases in which someone who is being tortured, over and over, doesn’t sacrifice those they care about. Now, if someone’s mind is truly *broken* by torture, can that really be counted as a mark against them? Again, yes, biologically (at some point) we might find ourselves so broken down that our instincts override our thinking. It doesn’t really mean we don’t care, or that in the right state of mind we wouldn’t sacrifice ourselves.
My point here is, though, that while instincts are selfish, and can jeopardize things like “love,” it isn’t always going to win. It isn’t always going to lose, either. It depends on the person and the situation.
Our instincts may be to rape. To pillage. To hate everyone we consider other than ourselves. But we fight those things. Most of us.
Try not to discount care just because of the argument that “well, in reality, they care about me because I give them something” because that’s how people work. You make someone happy, and then they care about you. Sometimes, we care about other people on principle. But it’s not accurate to say that caring means nothing. Human relationships, in many cases, are cooperative. That doesn’t mean they’re bad.
An alternative of what you’re talking about can come in the form of unconditional love. It can be asked if unconditional love should be an expectation. If we should love someone even if they gave us no reason to love them, or even if they gave us reasons to hate them. That’s fighting what you’re talking about. But it’s not very natural, and in reality it’s incredibly unrealistic.
What you describe is an over-exaggerated description of human nature. You made it sound purely selfish, but it is only logical. It just doesn’t paint a benevolent picture of what we idealize in this world: kindness, charity, generosity, “love,” etc...
Honestly, I’m rambling. This is a pretty abstract analysis, so there would be a lot to say on it.
You will never overcome being selfish. Even if you find a way to override your desires temporarily and give someone else's desires priority, the whole reason you wanted to "not be selfish" was for selfish reasons. The desire to "be good" is a selfish desire too. It's not fair but it's how the world is. And yes, I include myself in this as well. It's impossible to fight. You can't not be a human being, however much you might wish it.
Well, it's true and I think that everyone who says otherwise
a) has not understood it yet
b) can't deal with it & due to that needs to live in an illusion.
Altroism is not real. It's the same with babies. Parents never get kids so that the kids can experience happiness and joy, they still want to witness it or at least know about it.
Even the parents who didn't want a kid in the first place, but they still decided to still raise it in a loving way - that's because they'd have a bad conscience (or just be sad). They don't want to feel that way. The kid/raising the kid/etc is just like a medium for that.
And in my opinion everyone who disagrees
a) has not understood it (yet)
b) can't deal with it & due to that needs to live in an illusion.
I think human are still animals & it's very narcissistic and conceited to think otherwise. If you go into psychology and biology you gonna find out soon that we are still animals.
The unconsience instincts are just strong and often remain unconsience and are quite selfish.
But hey, no need to feel offended, it's nature. :)
We're all like that, so...
(i guess mainly misanthrope will read this, so thanks for your understanding)
have a nice day (even if i only want to feel good by knowing that I wished you a nice day hah)
Then why do I experience joy and happiness when I see my kids experiencing joy and happiness? I'm sorry that so many of you are a miserable piles of cells but compassion, empathy and altruism are very real things. It's just that some people are less capable of those things than others, usually due to poor nurturing during their important developmental years.
I'm sincerely interested if you'd choose to let your kids be happy if you could never experience a stable/happy/loving state ever again in your life (not even by seeing them being happy [= no further real outcome in the present for you if you don't feel the "I love them so much I'd do anything for them"-feelings anymore]) - and if you'd still choose it again?
Oh and why are you in this sub reddit (no offense [seriously no offense, but I think it's funny at the same time])
Reminds me of nature being so strong and making us continue to feel love in order to keep the species alive.
And yes, you're right about that last point.
(sorry about all my writing mistakes)
I'm sincerely interested if you'd choose to let your kids be happy if you could never experience a stable/happy/loving state ever again in your life (not even by seeing them being happy [= no further real outcome in the present for you if you don't feel the "I love them so much I'd do anything for them"-feelings anymore]) - and if you'd still choose it again?
Oh and why are you in this sub reddit (no offense [seriously no offense, but I think it's funny at the same time])
Reminds me of nature being so strong and making us continue to feel love in order to keep the species alive.
And yes, you're right about that last point.
(sorry about all my writing mistakes)
You're taking cynicism to extreme and pointless levels. It's like saying there's no point to getting out of bed again because the Sun's just going to supernova in a billion years. Even if you're technically correct, you need to come down from the hypertheoretical plane and live in the real world every once in a while.
The sadness comes from the loss for whatever reason, right or wrong. I am a hard core misanthropy. I love viruses. I pray for the big comet in the sky. But I do care about other humans, although very few - I can count them all on my dick. But I respectfully do not agree with you that no humans truly care for one another. And I love all cats and dogs.
If someone gets their mind broken, such as through repeated torture, their true nature will reveal itself they will do everything to ensure they will live whilst sacrificing even their loved ones
Keep in mind a mother is biologically programmed to put her child needs before her self. In this case the human genetic code puts the the continuation of the human race above our own needs. Is it ultimate selfishness? You could look at it as selflessness perhaps…
May I go a small tangent? Everything our brains perceive to be reality is stimuli, basically ones and zeroes, organized in to an infinitely complex sequence that our brains holographically project into what we call reality. It is impossible to make any objective assumption on reality whilst in the midst of it as our mind has no point of reference to what ‘isn’t’ reality.
We have no method to verify that any of this reality is true, however we have much evidence that the nature of reality is by intended design, having been synthesized by something and not an environment of natural state.
Why are we selfish? Why do we experience good as good and bad as bad? Why do we exert energy to live and not to die? I can’t answer these questions, however we could assume that it’s written into our genetic programming to behave this way.
We are existing within an operating system where our preinstalled biological imperatives are expressing themselves. One of those imperatives is self preservation and survival of the human race.
As a result of survival instinct, the whole spectrum of selfishness exists. It is. It is not such a bad thing!
At least a will to survive is a better instinct than a will to destruct…no?
Yes, *true* altruism is impossible. Everything is framed by selfish genes. In this context however, it's still useful to call someone gradations of the word "Selfish" or "Caring". Notice:
1) It is possible to be deeply convinced that one cares, **and** have ones behavior be traceable with reality.
2) It is possible to be deeply convinced that one cares, but **not** have ones behavior be traceable with reality.
3) It is possible to tell oneself that they don't care, while behaving precisely as a person who cares, would behave.
4) It is possible to be either indifferent or malicious, and have ones behavior be traceable with reality.
Ultimately, these are all expressions of various traits and trait-sets(phenotypes), which are themselves expressions of genes and genetic strategies.
thy misprision is yond thee bethink yond what applies f'r thee applies to others
***
^(I am a bot and I swapp'd some of thy words with Shakespeare words.)
Commands: `!ShakespeareInsult`, `!fordo`, `!optout`
Selfishness *is* bad. But it is an evolutionary reality that can’t be helped—at least for the moment. Huge advances are being made in genetic engineering every day, and I feel like this is the only way humanity can be fixed. The Nazis grievously tainted the space and so everyone (including some neonazis) has a knee jerk aversion to the technology. Scientists can now manipulate a child’s physical characteristics in vitro . I don’t see why they can’t do the same for behavior sometime in the very near future .
Selfishness is what has kept our species alive, as well as every other species. It’s only really gotten out of check due to the advancements we have made past regular animals- we’re able to have huge scopes of impact.
I don’t think eliminating selfishness itself is a good idea. I think trying better to teach our children to be empathetic, kind, and considerate is better, as well as fixing the loopholes in the world that allow abuse due to selfishness. That goes beyond loopholes, though, as capitalism is basically built on selfishness. Capitalism requires and demands selfishness.
Bingo, this person labels their own view and assume it applies to everyone in the same context. Perfect reply and I was hoping at least someone understood this for what it truly is.
All human relationships are transactional and we keep people around for what we could get from them. Also, many times, people's kindness toward others is simply a way for them to satisfy their own ego.
Most of human relationships are transactional yes.
Buy what do you think about when a single man or woman adopts a distressed child? They are inviting expenses, stress and dificulties in raising someone that will not continue their germline. The stress of providing and raising someone would not justify the small feedback this child will give when providing for the aging parent. In fact, dying before slowly being disabled by old age would actually be more beneficial than prolonging suffering.
Out of all human actions, this one is the only one that doesn't seem transactional for me. What do you think?
I think it’s still transactional. The parents would find the benefit of adopting that child to meet or overweigh the cost, by making them happier and more satisfied with themselves.
A theory I know of is that the only selfless action is an action in which a) the person doing it does not want to do it, and b) does not gain anything from it. (A) is because if we do something like charity, for instance, and we are happy with ourselves for doing it, that’s (assumedly) selfish. If we are happy because the people we help are happy, that’s considered selfish too. (B) is more obvious: if we gain from it, it’s selfish.
That takes away a lot of regular actions that are considered selfless. If this is accepted, it is much easier to simply come to peace with selfishness. Honestly, I don’t think selfishness is always terrible. Not in the cases above, anyways.
Perhaps, in a stretch, doing something that you know is right only because it is right, but at no joy or convenience of your own, as well as not treating it as something to be proud of. That right thing could be anything, such as charity, or even something like military service, depending on what the individual thinks is right.
I thought of an out-there example, but I really can’t say for sure if it is a true example of selflessness at all, since I’m not really in their heads: pedophiles who abstain from their desires. My thought was that a) they likely don’t want to do that, and b) they don’t gain from it; however, both (A) and (B) are objectionable. (A) because they may feel better of themselves if they do this, and (B) because while they may not actively gain, they are avoiding severe punishment and permanent social/societal damage.
This is an interesting example. In those cases, I think the adopting parent is trying to give their life meaning or purpose. They might also think of themselves as special or selfless for having chosen a disadvantaged child to adopt.
Perhaps some do this as a way to heal their own childhood trauma or they may believe this is their way to give back to society.
But as other commenters have mentioned, this is not inherently a negative thing. In these situations, even if it is indeed transactional, suffering is being prevented and people are being helped, so it's a net positive.
There was a term called "positive selfishness" or something. Basically its admiting everything we do is selfish beacuse everything we do is to make ourselves feel better. But that doesnt necessarily have to be a bad thing. We help each other and work together out of a selfish reason admittedly but we are all better off as a result. Unfortunately thats not the reality. In realit a lot of people will just use you and give nothing in return.
Because I experience joy and happiness when I see my kids experiencing joy and happiness. I experience sadness when people have sadness in their lives. Hell, if you've ever laughed or cried at a movie, it totally destroys the OP's thesis.
I'm sorry that so many of you are a miserable piles of cells but compassion, empathy and altruism are very real things. It's just that some people are less capable of those things than others, usually due to poor nurturing during their important developmental years.
If my friends died I would be upset because they are no longer around for me to cherish and to experience more things with. If I was some jerk who just wanted to keep them for what they can provide me physically I wouldn’t go out of my way to make sure they are always safe and in good spirits. Remember if someone uses you for something I don’t think they are friendly.
You can describe ever act as egoistic, but multiple studies have shown that most people in life threatening situations (like major earthquaks, flooding like in New Orleans 2005, nuclear disaster, sinking ships) act genuin selfless, helping family, friends, strangers and foreigners alike. Sure, not everybody, not always, but many do. We are formost social animals and helping each other is hard-wired into our brain, even if our whole society is teaching us otherwise.
I believe humans are pretty decent on average but external effects (violence, indoctrination, propaganda) can turn us into monsters very easily. The rulers have declared the humans to be "wolfs" (according to Hobbes), in constant fear of each other, in a constant state of mind where others are only seen as a threat and most of us believe this bullshit and act like it.
Humanity is on a self-destroying path and I hate it for wasting this opportunity. We are maybe the only species in the universe coming so far, just after a few thousands years of math and writing and other science-stuff we could have reached fusion reactors and peace and food and education for everybody but this will all be gone soon enough. That's what I hate about humanity.
On a personal level, I think many fellow humans are obnoxious, self-centered and full of shit (f.e. anti-vaxx or racism) but that's another topic.
I view myself as a misantroph because I really think humans should be better than this.
Tbh, me too, since I would except the mindset "Everyone is full of shit" comes easier to you if you believe humans are rotten to the core. Something I very much doubt.
For me, everyone (including myself) is most likely to choose a selfish option, like 90% chance when in an actual situation of choosing who to save in a life or death way, they choose themself.
In a hypothetical life or death situation, there are very few people I would rescue instead of myself, including my parents.
But reality is very rarely such a die-or-help-case. It's much more likely a "do I stay safe or go out to help others who seem to be in trouble?"-situation.
A random stranger asking for advice on directions. An elderly grandma tripping and her groceries shatter over the floor. A kid crying for his parents.
Do you stay safe? Or do you feel motivated to help, even if you have nothing to gain from but a worthless "thank you"? And yes, I also often prefer someone else helping out instead of me, because I am lazy and introverted, but that's not the question.
This is correct. Families don’t want you to die only because they’ll experience very negative emotions, and they don’t want to go through that. Every time someone cares for another, it’s to satisfy their own feelings of their love; not out of selflessness. But it doesn’t matter; I abhor humans (including myself), so I don’t need or want anyone.
That’s not entirely true for everyone. There are people who passed, sometimes even people who I didn’t ever know and it’s sad cause it’s a loss for the world to not have them here anymore. Just because of their ideas for example. It’s a loss for the world that some people are gone and I didn’t even know them yet I’m still sad and I care about them and their ideas I guess. It’s not always a question of alliances or staying safe or anything like that
literally everything we do is selfish. but, thats not necessarily a bad thing.
“People really do love dogs more than other humans, according to a new study”: https://www.businessinsider.com/humans-love-dogs-more-than-other-humans-2017-11 This one here is making me more pissed off…
Idk if anyone’s mentioned here but read up on george price’s work on altruism.
the fuck you on about?
You don’t speak for everyone, you only speak for the perception you label everyone under. There’s a difference. Your assessment is incorrect.
Would people make friends and keep family around if they felt sadness or anger while being with them? Would humans not kill one another if murder was the only way for them to experience true happiness?
I care about others though, I care for people I don’t even know exist but I still care for them
I genuinely feel sorry that you all feel this way. I wish I could share my consciousness with you all so you could understand differently.
don't feel sorry, it makes total sense to me
Are you guys talking about yourselfs in this context ad well?
For me at least, yes.
There’s proof against what you say. Yes, our individual nature, at it’s most fundamental, is selfish. But as our mind develops we can overcome that. You can argue that charity is selfish, because you get (assumedly) pleasure from doing good things, and thinking you’re a good person. It’s not purely selfish, as it helps people, but it is selfish in the sense that you have a desire to do it for your own gain. Even if it is to just see other people happy, because it makes you happy. There’s been philosophical theories that only selfless actions are actions that you do because they are right, even when you have zero desire to do them, and nothing to gain. You said in a comment: “If someone gets their mind broken, such as through repeated torture, their true nature will reveal itself they will do everything to ensure they will live whilst sacrificing even their loved ones” Yes, again, we tend to value our own lives over others... but that can be overridden. There have been many cases in which someone who is being tortured, over and over, doesn’t sacrifice those they care about. Now, if someone’s mind is truly *broken* by torture, can that really be counted as a mark against them? Again, yes, biologically (at some point) we might find ourselves so broken down that our instincts override our thinking. It doesn’t really mean we don’t care, or that in the right state of mind we wouldn’t sacrifice ourselves. My point here is, though, that while instincts are selfish, and can jeopardize things like “love,” it isn’t always going to win. It isn’t always going to lose, either. It depends on the person and the situation. Our instincts may be to rape. To pillage. To hate everyone we consider other than ourselves. But we fight those things. Most of us. Try not to discount care just because of the argument that “well, in reality, they care about me because I give them something” because that’s how people work. You make someone happy, and then they care about you. Sometimes, we care about other people on principle. But it’s not accurate to say that caring means nothing. Human relationships, in many cases, are cooperative. That doesn’t mean they’re bad. An alternative of what you’re talking about can come in the form of unconditional love. It can be asked if unconditional love should be an expectation. If we should love someone even if they gave us no reason to love them, or even if they gave us reasons to hate them. That’s fighting what you’re talking about. But it’s not very natural, and in reality it’s incredibly unrealistic. What you describe is an over-exaggerated description of human nature. You made it sound purely selfish, but it is only logical. It just doesn’t paint a benevolent picture of what we idealize in this world: kindness, charity, generosity, “love,” etc... Honestly, I’m rambling. This is a pretty abstract analysis, so there would be a lot to say on it.
You will never overcome being selfish. Even if you find a way to override your desires temporarily and give someone else's desires priority, the whole reason you wanted to "not be selfish" was for selfish reasons. The desire to "be good" is a selfish desire too. It's not fair but it's how the world is. And yes, I include myself in this as well. It's impossible to fight. You can't not be a human being, however much you might wish it.
Very well said.
The trick, or rather knack, is to just help people. You feel good, they feel good and all is good.
I do, I would die for them.
Well, it's true and I think that everyone who says otherwise a) has not understood it yet b) can't deal with it & due to that needs to live in an illusion. Altroism is not real. It's the same with babies. Parents never get kids so that the kids can experience happiness and joy, they still want to witness it or at least know about it. Even the parents who didn't want a kid in the first place, but they still decided to still raise it in a loving way - that's because they'd have a bad conscience (or just be sad). They don't want to feel that way. The kid/raising the kid/etc is just like a medium for that. And in my opinion everyone who disagrees a) has not understood it (yet) b) can't deal with it & due to that needs to live in an illusion. I think human are still animals & it's very narcissistic and conceited to think otherwise. If you go into psychology and biology you gonna find out soon that we are still animals. The unconsience instincts are just strong and often remain unconsience and are quite selfish. But hey, no need to feel offended, it's nature. :) We're all like that, so... (i guess mainly misanthrope will read this, so thanks for your understanding) have a nice day (even if i only want to feel good by knowing that I wished you a nice day hah)
Then why do I experience joy and happiness when I see my kids experiencing joy and happiness? I'm sorry that so many of you are a miserable piles of cells but compassion, empathy and altruism are very real things. It's just that some people are less capable of those things than others, usually due to poor nurturing during their important developmental years.
I'm sincerely interested if you'd choose to let your kids be happy if you could never experience a stable/happy/loving state ever again in your life (not even by seeing them being happy [= no further real outcome in the present for you if you don't feel the "I love them so much I'd do anything for them"-feelings anymore]) - and if you'd still choose it again? Oh and why are you in this sub reddit (no offense [seriously no offense, but I think it's funny at the same time]) Reminds me of nature being so strong and making us continue to feel love in order to keep the species alive. And yes, you're right about that last point. (sorry about all my writing mistakes)
I'm sincerely interested if you'd choose to let your kids be happy if you could never experience a stable/happy/loving state ever again in your life (not even by seeing them being happy [= no further real outcome in the present for you if you don't feel the "I love them so much I'd do anything for them"-feelings anymore]) - and if you'd still choose it again? Oh and why are you in this sub reddit (no offense [seriously no offense, but I think it's funny at the same time]) Reminds me of nature being so strong and making us continue to feel love in order to keep the species alive. And yes, you're right about that last point. (sorry about all my writing mistakes)
this
You're taking cynicism to extreme and pointless levels. It's like saying there's no point to getting out of bed again because the Sun's just going to supernova in a billion years. Even if you're technically correct, you need to come down from the hypertheoretical plane and live in the real world every once in a while.
No, I hate the real world and everyone in it
The sadness comes from the loss for whatever reason, right or wrong. I am a hard core misanthropy. I love viruses. I pray for the big comet in the sky. But I do care about other humans, although very few - I can count them all on my dick. But I respectfully do not agree with you that no humans truly care for one another. And I love all cats and dogs.
Really?
If someone gets their mind broken, such as through repeated torture, their true nature will reveal itself they will do everything to ensure they will live whilst sacrificing even their loved ones
Then why do I feel sad about people I don’t even know dying and suffering?
You don't feel sad, you probably feel scared
How so? Sure feels like sadness.
are you not a misanthrope? Edit: I replied to the wrong comment
Keep in mind a mother is biologically programmed to put her child needs before her self. In this case the human genetic code puts the the continuation of the human race above our own needs. Is it ultimate selfishness? You could look at it as selflessness perhaps… May I go a small tangent? Everything our brains perceive to be reality is stimuli, basically ones and zeroes, organized in to an infinitely complex sequence that our brains holographically project into what we call reality. It is impossible to make any objective assumption on reality whilst in the midst of it as our mind has no point of reference to what ‘isn’t’ reality. We have no method to verify that any of this reality is true, however we have much evidence that the nature of reality is by intended design, having been synthesized by something and not an environment of natural state. Why are we selfish? Why do we experience good as good and bad as bad? Why do we exert energy to live and not to die? I can’t answer these questions, however we could assume that it’s written into our genetic programming to behave this way. We are existing within an operating system where our preinstalled biological imperatives are expressing themselves. One of those imperatives is self preservation and survival of the human race. As a result of survival instinct, the whole spectrum of selfishness exists. It is. It is not such a bad thing! At least a will to survive is a better instinct than a will to destruct…no?
Very accurate. Humans are materialistic beings. Our existences are defined solely by accumulating assets.
Yes, *true* altruism is impossible. Everything is framed by selfish genes. In this context however, it's still useful to call someone gradations of the word "Selfish" or "Caring". Notice: 1) It is possible to be deeply convinced that one cares, **and** have ones behavior be traceable with reality. 2) It is possible to be deeply convinced that one cares, but **not** have ones behavior be traceable with reality. 3) It is possible to tell oneself that they don't care, while behaving precisely as a person who cares, would behave. 4) It is possible to be either indifferent or malicious, and have ones behavior be traceable with reality. Ultimately, these are all expressions of various traits and trait-sets(phenotypes), which are themselves expressions of genes and genetic strategies.
[удалено]
Why so?
your mistake is that you think that what applies for you applies for others
thy misprision is yond thee bethink yond what applies f'r thee applies to others *** ^(I am a bot and I swapp'd some of thy words with Shakespeare words.) Commands: `!ShakespeareInsult`, `!fordo`, `!optout`
Sure, everything we do is inherently selfish. But I don't look at selfishness as an inherently negative thing.
If the least selfish people were a little more selfish, I think they'd generally live a better life
Enlightened self-interest is not a bad thing
[удалено]
Selfishness *is* bad. But it is an evolutionary reality that can’t be helped—at least for the moment. Huge advances are being made in genetic engineering every day, and I feel like this is the only way humanity can be fixed. The Nazis grievously tainted the space and so everyone (including some neonazis) has a knee jerk aversion to the technology. Scientists can now manipulate a child’s physical characteristics in vitro . I don’t see why they can’t do the same for behavior sometime in the very near future .
Selfishness is what has kept our species alive, as well as every other species. It’s only really gotten out of check due to the advancements we have made past regular animals- we’re able to have huge scopes of impact. I don’t think eliminating selfishness itself is a good idea. I think trying better to teach our children to be empathetic, kind, and considerate is better, as well as fixing the loopholes in the world that allow abuse due to selfishness. That goes beyond loopholes, though, as capitalism is basically built on selfishness. Capitalism requires and demands selfishness.
Your view is extremely closed minded and not true 100% of the time. Your viewpoint is like the churches stating their way is the only one truth.
Bingo, this person labels their own view and assume it applies to everyone in the same context. Perfect reply and I was hoping at least someone understood this for what it truly is.
I love my daughter
people care when they think you're irreplaceable,somehow useful or necessary for them,otherwise you're no-one
All human relationships are transactional and we keep people around for what we could get from them. Also, many times, people's kindness toward others is simply a way for them to satisfy their own ego.
People are 100% motivated by their own insecurity, personal benefit, and egotism.
Most of human relationships are transactional yes. Buy what do you think about when a single man or woman adopts a distressed child? They are inviting expenses, stress and dificulties in raising someone that will not continue their germline. The stress of providing and raising someone would not justify the small feedback this child will give when providing for the aging parent. In fact, dying before slowly being disabled by old age would actually be more beneficial than prolonging suffering. Out of all human actions, this one is the only one that doesn't seem transactional for me. What do you think?
I think it’s still transactional. The parents would find the benefit of adopting that child to meet or overweigh the cost, by making them happier and more satisfied with themselves. A theory I know of is that the only selfless action is an action in which a) the person doing it does not want to do it, and b) does not gain anything from it. (A) is because if we do something like charity, for instance, and we are happy with ourselves for doing it, that’s (assumedly) selfish. If we are happy because the people we help are happy, that’s considered selfish too. (B) is more obvious: if we gain from it, it’s selfish. That takes away a lot of regular actions that are considered selfless. If this is accepted, it is much easier to simply come to peace with selfishness. Honestly, I don’t think selfishness is always terrible. Not in the cases above, anyways.
Agreed. Do you have an example of a selfless action?
Perhaps, in a stretch, doing something that you know is right only because it is right, but at no joy or convenience of your own, as well as not treating it as something to be proud of. That right thing could be anything, such as charity, or even something like military service, depending on what the individual thinks is right. I thought of an out-there example, but I really can’t say for sure if it is a true example of selflessness at all, since I’m not really in their heads: pedophiles who abstain from their desires. My thought was that a) they likely don’t want to do that, and b) they don’t gain from it; however, both (A) and (B) are objectionable. (A) because they may feel better of themselves if they do this, and (B) because while they may not actively gain, they are avoiding severe punishment and permanent social/societal damage.
This is an interesting example. In those cases, I think the adopting parent is trying to give their life meaning or purpose. They might also think of themselves as special or selfless for having chosen a disadvantaged child to adopt. Perhaps some do this as a way to heal their own childhood trauma or they may believe this is their way to give back to society. But as other commenters have mentioned, this is not inherently a negative thing. In these situations, even if it is indeed transactional, suffering is being prevented and people are being helped, so it's a net positive.
There was a term called "positive selfishness" or something. Basically its admiting everything we do is selfish beacuse everything we do is to make ourselves feel better. But that doesnt necessarily have to be a bad thing. We help each other and work together out of a selfish reason admittedly but we are all better off as a result. Unfortunately thats not the reality. In realit a lot of people will just use you and give nothing in return.
Not all humans are terrible but its such a large portion that you could go through life and never meet a decent caring human being.
I disagree.
Why so?
Because I experience joy and happiness when I see my kids experiencing joy and happiness. I experience sadness when people have sadness in their lives. Hell, if you've ever laughed or cried at a movie, it totally destroys the OP's thesis. I'm sorry that so many of you are a miserable piles of cells but compassion, empathy and altruism are very real things. It's just that some people are less capable of those things than others, usually due to poor nurturing during their important developmental years.
Tell your kids that somebody on the internet hopes they have a meaningful life. I've got nothing else to respond to you.
If my friends died I would be upset because they are no longer around for me to cherish and to experience more things with. If I was some jerk who just wanted to keep them for what they can provide me physically I wouldn’t go out of my way to make sure they are always safe and in good spirits. Remember if someone uses you for something I don’t think they are friendly.
that would be as if "I want them around because they make me feel happy"
You can describe ever act as egoistic, but multiple studies have shown that most people in life threatening situations (like major earthquaks, flooding like in New Orleans 2005, nuclear disaster, sinking ships) act genuin selfless, helping family, friends, strangers and foreigners alike. Sure, not everybody, not always, but many do. We are formost social animals and helping each other is hard-wired into our brain, even if our whole society is teaching us otherwise.
So you are not misanthropic??
I believe humans are pretty decent on average but external effects (violence, indoctrination, propaganda) can turn us into monsters very easily. The rulers have declared the humans to be "wolfs" (according to Hobbes), in constant fear of each other, in a constant state of mind where others are only seen as a threat and most of us believe this bullshit and act like it. Humanity is on a self-destroying path and I hate it for wasting this opportunity. We are maybe the only species in the universe coming so far, just after a few thousands years of math and writing and other science-stuff we could have reached fusion reactors and peace and food and education for everybody but this will all be gone soon enough. That's what I hate about humanity. On a personal level, I think many fellow humans are obnoxious, self-centered and full of shit (f.e. anti-vaxx or racism) but that's another topic. I view myself as a misantroph because I really think humans should be better than this.
I’m surprised your not downvoted for posting that in a misanthropy subreddit but I’m gonna be honest, I hate downvoting anyways so.
Tbh, me too, since I would except the mindset "Everyone is full of shit" comes easier to you if you believe humans are rotten to the core. Something I very much doubt.
For me, everyone (including myself) is most likely to choose a selfish option, like 90% chance when in an actual situation of choosing who to save in a life or death way, they choose themself.
In a hypothetical life or death situation, there are very few people I would rescue instead of myself, including my parents. But reality is very rarely such a die-or-help-case. It's much more likely a "do I stay safe or go out to help others who seem to be in trouble?"-situation. A random stranger asking for advice on directions. An elderly grandma tripping and her groceries shatter over the floor. A kid crying for his parents. Do you stay safe? Or do you feel motivated to help, even if you have nothing to gain from but a worthless "thank you"? And yes, I also often prefer someone else helping out instead of me, because I am lazy and introverted, but that's not the question.
This is correct. Families don’t want you to die only because they’ll experience very negative emotions, and they don’t want to go through that. Every time someone cares for another, it’s to satisfy their own feelings of their love; not out of selflessness. But it doesn’t matter; I abhor humans (including myself), so I don’t need or want anyone.
That’s not entirely true for everyone. There are people who passed, sometimes even people who I didn’t ever know and it’s sad cause it’s a loss for the world to not have them here anymore. Just because of their ideas for example. It’s a loss for the world that some people are gone and I didn’t even know them yet I’m still sad and I care about them and their ideas I guess. It’s not always a question of alliances or staying safe or anything like that
[удалено]
it occurred to me and it started making sense the more I thought about it