is everyone selfish?

[@IdeasInHat]

What's your opinion?

[@giuseppeLizzi-rj3er]

Yes

[@Januaryof28]

Nah selfishness is a luxury

[@Scrooge1801]

People who do for others expecting nothing in return are not selfish

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Scrooge1801 Let me fix that sentence for you, so you can understand the point being made: "people who WANT to do things for others expecting nothing in return are"...selfish.

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Scrooge1801 Helping another person is you fulfilling your own personal wants to help others.

[@ApplesGhost]

The difference between egoism and altruism in the individual is whether they desire reciprocity for the costs they incur.

[@IdeasInHat]

That would be, I think, the simple and ordinary notion. Someone who is altruistic does not want a reward for costs incurred. But some philosophers would argue that an egoist could also not want a reward for their costs incurred. They did their act for the same reason that the altruist did: personal want. I ultimately lean towards the idea that everyone is selfish because I cannot fathom a way of characterizing altruistic behavior, intentional behavior that is, without relying on some kind of personal want.

[@Januaryof28]

@@IdeasInHatI think it’s an idealistic philosophy like for example my mom told me always give people your best but if I take this literally I would want something back or I’d only give them something I didn’t value . Like if i wanted to give my cousin something I’d have to walk all the way to his house which I value being comfortable in my own house so I’d need a reward equal to that. A true altruistic person would give their life or organs up to a dying friend in an extreme example but I guess alturism for my life would be maybe doing more chores or something.

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Januaryof28 Hmm. So I think to understand the point I am making, you would have to ask whether this question is applicable to the person giving up the organs or not: "did that person WANT to give up their organs," and, "can someone's choice ever be a product of anything other than their WANT to make that choice". That might clarify where I am coming from. I agree, people should care for one another; however, I don't see how we could escape our wants.

[@IdeasInHat]

@@patriciacole8773 You can, but why might you be asking?

[@IdeasInHat]

@@patriciacole8773 I think you are still talking about outcomes that benefit others rather than yourself. If you want to understand the real problem, then ask yourself if it is possible to make a choice that you would not choose. As far as I can tell, choices are made because we WANT one thing rather than another.

[@yoyochan6668]

Considering that humanity lived in smaller communities with the focus of mutual survival i dont believe everyone is just selfish. We are literally programmed to feel empathy and read facial expressions. In wealthy western nations there is a lot of individualism so people there do tend to have more selfish tendencies Of course humans are also very moldable to their environment.

[@IdeasInHat]

@@yoyochan6668 Do you think someone can be selfish while not being an individualist? Or are those the same thing for you?

[@yoyochan6668]

@@IdeasInHat yes

[@shlomobachar4123]

In a standard worldview (from a personal view), everyone is ONLY selfish and egoist. All actions are for "receiving" something, some form of pleasure. Even if it seems like "giving" externally. From the absolute reality view, everything is altruistic, as everything runs to get to some balance, to arrive to some optimum. So everything goes to a system-wise better point.

[@IdeasInHat]

I think I understand what you said, lol. But the second half was a bit hard to understand. Are you saying every individual operates from selfishness, and that in the context of society that selfishness becomes altruism?

[@shlomobachar4123]

@@IdeasInHat If you see the life from a standpoint of your body, that there is you and there are others (i.e. dualistic worldview), all units (each individual) wants to receive (egoist). I replaced the definitions of egoism to “ the will to receive” and altruism to “the will to give”. Each unit or individual is like a point that only wants or sucks energy from the environment or universe. But if you think that in fact there are no units and there is only Oneness (non dualistic worldview, as in Advaita Vedanta), all the units are fictitious and virtual and there is only giving, i.e. Love (not love as a standard understanding) the giving force, One thing. In full unity there is nothing who can receive as it is nondual. Check nonduality…

[@IdeasInHat]

@@shlomobachar4123 Yeah, so if you just define humans as not existing, then this conversation isn't even relevant for you, haha.

[@questionminecrafter]

Yoo I have been thinking exactly this for a while that everyone is selfish. Even if someone was ordered to do a charity, they did it because they WANTED to follow the order hence, selfish and if they don't do it even then it's selfish because they didn't WANT to do it. So either way it's always selfish and I can not find a way around this. Nice video ideashit, poopling here.

[@BenIsFiguringitOut]

Idk. I think human nature does have self interest as a dominate aspect of our existence. Idk. This topic has so many nuances in it.

[@IdeasInHat]

I think we are self interested by definition. I am uncertain how to avoid saying otherwise.

[@Januaryof28]

Compared to other mammals yes but I don’t hang around dolphins enough not everyone has the same morals but personally I only use them to live in comfort

[@Scrooge1801]

Facts !! It is a lot of nuances but because self preservation is the first law of nature we all can be some what selfish but it’s depends on what is a individual definition of selfish

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Januaryof28 I think you are making a different point than me. In the video I tried to clarify this. Some people will discuss outcomes, while philosophers are discussing philosophy of mind. Humans do whatever they want by definition, since a choice involves a want to fulfil that choice. Ergo, by definition, humans are selfish. Does that clarify it?

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Scrooge1801 Yes, and as far as I can tell, the only definition I can find of selfishness applies to every choice a human makes. Humans are pleasure seeking machines, even when it is pleasure from helping others.

[@Scrooge1801]

I don’t fully agree because some people are truly just and have a just moral compass not cause they want to but the sense of knowing what is right and just having a heart to help someone who maybe in a worse situation

[@FeelingPoyChina]

hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh you're either too stupid or you're just lying lmfao

[@Djp2987]

majority of people are selfish and lack empathy. cost of living and people scraping by, made people less giving and helpful, fending for themselves.

[@IdeasInHat]

There is interesting research actually that shows low income people give our larger percentages of their wealth; and, not only that, are better at considering the well-being of other people!

[@IdeasInHat]

@@patriciacole8773 I am not an expert on the psychology of each class, but from what I have read, poor people engage in more behaviors that could be called "products of empathy," and they are more charitable. This holds true on average for the entire class. Meanwhile, rich people give away less of their wealth and are more likely to engage in behaviors that are the product of a "lack of empathy".

[@IdeasInHat]

@@patriciacole8773 I am not certain about the crime statistics; however, it would not shock me if those in the lower socioeconomic status do have more crime. I would only add that such a statistic does not entail mutual exclusivity. Someone could, for instance, go to prison for possession of drugs, donate large amounts of money, and have higher empathy than a wealthy person.

[@weezerdog3]

I feel like this comes up a lot when people are critical of politicians. Take for instance, their acts of charity or anthropology. In some way, they may be doing something simply to bolster their campaign or to improve their image, but they could also just be doing it for purely altruistic reasons. Critics will argue they are committing charitable acts for selfish reasons, but the intention of the politician isn't actually known to anyone but themselves. I think this is classified under consequentialism? (Whereby the selfishness of people's acts are judged by only their effects or consequences, and their intentions, whether selfish or not, are irrelevant). I have personally found this issue come up on the issue of having children. In relation to my family and their values, I am being selfish by not having children, but in relation to the rest of society, I would arguably be less selfish by donating my money to people who really want to have children, but can't afford to. Likewise, I've found many people who have kids to be selfish in relation to other people with the defense being that they need to hoard resources for their own children. I guess the main point of what I'm trying to say is that I've found characterizing an act as selfish easier when in relation to a specific person or group than in relation to society at large. Is someone's action selfish? Yes, if it is against someone else's welfare or desires, but since people's values vary so wildly in a large population, it would be very hard to characterize some acts as having any definite orientation on selfishness. Some people say that raising kids benefits society and is morally altruistic while others think it taxes the system and is morally selfish. Characterizing an act as selfish or altruistic at all relies heavily on the values of the person making the judgement and who is going to be affected (and whether or not the effected person is themselves a selfish person seeking their own gain against any benefits to others). Edit: my auto-correct keeps correcting "characterizing" to "characterized", despite the tense being incorrect.

[@weezerdog3]

Likewise, I feel like a scenario in which a selfish individual feels that their own moral values are being threatened by someone acting altruistically, they could easily label an "objectively" altruistic action (if such a thing exists) as selfish, because the altruistic person is acting against their own selfish morality (and promoting their own altruistic one, thus acting in their own self-interest).

[@IdeasInHat]

You bring up a related but slightly different point, and I agree with you. Many people will rely on their own relative understanding about the outcomes of actions and completely ignore the sacrifices and intentions associated with producing the outcomes. And the reason why is because they want to beat you over the head via moral grandstanding. They call you selfish when they dislike your outcomes, but will call you altruistic when they like the outcomes you produce. Similar to the idea that rich people will say, "it is good to spend and live a little," while poor people will say, "it is good to realize not everything in life is about money". It's just a way of construing philosophy to make ourselves look better than we are.

[@IdeasInHat]

@@weezerdog3 I also agree about throwing around the word altruistic and selfish for personal benefit. I mentioned in the video that some people will use selfishness as an excuse to never be good, or as you said, to undermine the good that other people will do. That is something to look out for. My notion of selfishness is meant to be aa neutral as possible. Neither a good nor a bad thing; in the same way that consciousness is neither a good nor a bad thing. I think humans are by definition selfish, but that isn't supposed to be a dirty word. I understand that culturally it is, however.

[@Januaryof28]

I view as philosophy as the same way I view religion. I can see as helpful to ground up the harder life questions but not the solution to everything. I believe ego is some early cultural imprint that’s practically for the groups safety maybe this is a selfish definition but idk

[@Scrooge1801]

I see that the heart of man is so wicked that they can’t comprehend the reality of true compassion I get no pleasure out of giving my goods away or anything I don’t do it for validation I do what is right

[@questionminecrafter]

You do what is right because you want to, you could just don't do it and even if you don't do it then you don't do it because you don't want to so either way you are selfish, you do what you want.

[@Scrooge1801]

@@questionminecrafter how I? I can’t comprehend that . I do what I can when I can not for validation or some internal joy or gratification. Simply saying would you want help if you was in the other person shoes . If you can’t think pass your self then you are selfish. I would want help if I was in a the other person position so why would I refuse to help someone. I don’t go about my day trying to fix everything or everyone problems but if opportunities cross my path and I see an opportunity to help if I can I will.

[@questionminecrafter]

@@Scrooge1801 The word selfish has bad reputation in the world and that's how you are looking at it but what i am saying and what the guy in the video is saying that being selfish doesn't mean you are the bad guy it just means that you do what you want, a mother cares for her child because she WANTS to, a person helps the homeless because he WANTS to he doesn't expect anything in return but helping the homeless fulfills his desire to help the helpless, you drink wanter because you WANT to, you care for your family because you WANT to that doesn't make you a bad guy. What i am saying is it's impossible to not be selfish, anything we do, all our acts are for our self, to fulfill our needs and desires and wants, it doesn't mean you are a bad guy, it is a more philosophical take on the meaning of the word "selfish", it's different to the meaning that you are assuming and what is generally assumed. If you can find a scenario where a person does anything that they didn't want to do then let me know, it would prove my definition of selfish(all and any act done by self regardless of the nature of the act makes the person selfish) wrong.

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Scrooge1801 Questionminecrafter is understanding the point. I think you are looking at the word selfish as if it were a bad thing. Helping people is selfish, and I am glad you help people. Your good actions aren't negated because they were selfish.

[@Scrooge1801]

@@IdeasInHat what ever you say

[@cheekygrin6258]

Ok so if you want to help someone you are willingly contributing to their wellbeing and to yours at the same time, making this act somewhat selfish but what about someone who gets absolutely no pleasure in helping others or someone who won't feel empathy towards others, if that person decides to tip generously or donate to charity, does it make rheir act more alteuistic than if it was done by an empathetic person naturally inclined to care about others?

[@IdeasInHat]

I wouldn't say so. Because they still choose to do something they wanted to do. The problem I always struggled with, and still do, is I don't know how to describe intentional behavior without using the phrase "I want to x,". For instance, in your example, the person would say, "I wanted to donate to charity, even though I don't get pleasure from helping others".

[@Exteriti]

​@@IdeasInHat What if that shifts into 'i gave because i can"

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Exteriti But you can doesn't mean you will, and so the next question would be, "why did you do something simply because you can?"

[@Exteriti]

@@IdeasInHatYoure right. i hadnt thought that far lmaoo

[@IdeasInHat]

@@Exteriti If you think a solution let me know! I cannot seem to find a way of avoiding an appeal to desire.

[@rebeccabaker3517]

This is a philosophy of the lost.

[@IdeasInHat]

Idk. I don't feel lost. And I really like doing charitable acts. What's wrong with the philosophy?

[@Scrooge1801]

I don’t fully agree because some people are truly just and have a just moral compass not cause they want to but the sense of knowing what is right and just having a heart to help someone who maybe in a worse situation

[@questionminecrafter]

Why don't they not help.

[@Scrooge1801]

@@questionminecrafter because they have instincts knowing it is the moral just and right thing to do. Most of the time it doesn’t cost or change anything in a person life to help someone when they don’t help it’s out of being selfish if they help someone it’s not going to cost them a life fortune or take time off the life clock maybe time off the day but not there life span. By not helping is not going to make there life any better or worst . They don’t help because they’re selfish and the ones who help just know it’s the right thing to do

[@questionminecrafter]

@@Scrooge1801 oh so you are saying they do it because they want to do the right thing?

[@Scrooge1801]

@@questionminecrafter The right thing is the only thing that truly matters we can’t take nothing to our grave but what we stood for and done in this world. Is it selfish to not want to be selfish?

[@Scrooge1801]

@@questionminecrafter most likely I am not going to do anything to my own demise but in some cases I will.