Daily Literature Quotes

[Noblejanobii]

It's a psychological/philosophical argument, but I do believe there is no such thing as an unselfish behaviour (we just like to think there are!).

Selfishness isn't always correlated with immorality. Understanding that was the first step to learning that taking care of myself is very important (especially when you're the type of person to ruin your own wellbeing for somebody else's - no one is that important). You just need to set standards for which selfish behaviours are okay.

Given that, by my beliefs and morality, selfishness is inherently wrong, I try not be selfish if at all. See, I view selflessness as doing something for someone else when there is no possible gain or even there is a possible loss for you involved. It's sacrificing yourself for someone else when there's nothing for you to receive or gain from the situation at hand. The most I gain from what I do is a thanks and a little respect, but I still consider that a selfless action since I can't use either of those to my own advantage.

But to each their own.

[Tenacity]

Given that, by my beliefs and morality, selfishness is inherently wrong, I try not be selfish if at all. See, I view selflessness as doing something for someone else when there is no possible gain or even there is a possible loss for you involved. It's sacrificing yourself for someone else when there's nothing for you to receive or gain from the situation at hand. The most I gain from what I do is a thanks and a little respect, but I still consider that a selfless action since I can't use either of those to my own advantage.

But to each their own.

There is a possible gain though - the approval of the other person. An ally is a very real advantage. We're very social creatures, it's where our notion of morality evolved from to begin with.

Question (and this is a moral dilemma I was involved in and what ultimately led me to my current beliefs) - if somebody close to you had a mental illness / belief that meant every time you did something that acknowledged the existence of people you didn't know or care about, they came down with severe anxiety, would you ignore other people for them?

[Noblejanobii]

There is a possible gain though - the approval of the other person. An ally is a very real advantage. We're very social creatures, it's where our notion of morality evolved from to begin with.

Question (and this is a moral dilemma I was involved in and what ultimately led me to my current beliefs) - if somebody close to you had a mental illness / belief that meant every time you did something that acknowledged the existence of people you didn't know or care about, they came down with severe anxiety, would you ignore other people for them?

Tell that to all the people I give money to and then they turn around and spread rumors about me behind my back. I don't care if anyone approves of me. Learned that lesson in middle school. I am who I am and I don't care what you think of me. I am kind because it's what I believe is right and I don't think I deserve any reward for doing what's right. They don't become my allies the majority of the time, I don't gain their approval, in fact I'm pretty sure I'm just a walking ATM to most people but because I know what their home lives are like, I figure, if someone has to show them kindness since their parents obviously don't. That's not selfish. Show me what advantage wasting my time and money for people who give literally zero crap if I get hit by a bus in the next five minutes gives me? Because I've been doing it for four years and I have yet to see any advantages. It's just called being nice.

Just so I'm clear on the terms before I answer, like if I say donated to a fund that provides food to people on Africa? That sort of acknowledgement or something else?

And before you think to discuss this further, please understand two things:
1) this isn't the proper place to even have this discussion. If it relates to the quote I'll let it slide but this doesn't really relate.
2) Please understand that it is futile to try and convince me otherwise. My beliefs shall stand as they are and it's useless to think you can change how I think. I'm stubborn as a mule.

[Tenacity]

Tell that to all the people I give money to and then they turn around and spread rumors about me behind my back. I don't care if anyone approves of me. Learned that lesson in middle school. I am who I am and I don't care what you think of me. I am kind because it's what I believe is right and I don't think I deserve any reward for doing what's right. They don't become my allies the majority of the time, I don't gain their approval, in fact I'm pretty sure I'm just a walking ATM to most people but because I know what their home lives are like, I figure, if someone has to show them kindness since their parents obviously don't. That's not selfish. Show me what advantage wasting my time and money for people who give literally zero crap if I get hit by a bus in the next five minutes gives me? Because I've been doing it for four years and I have yet to see any advantages. It's just called being nice.

Just so I'm clear on the terms before I answer, like if I say donated to a fund that provides food to people on Africa? That sort of acknowledgement or something else?

Just because people betray you, it doesn't mean that their allegiance was a potential gain at the time of the good deed. I'm not saying kindness is impossible. I'm just saying that nobody is kind without (potential) gain unless they are manipulated to do so (often by people who use the word 'selfish'). I can even show that giving money to poor people even when they dislike you is selfish - you give money to them because you believe it is right to (you admitted this), but the only reason you do that is because you want to a morally good person. Is that not itself a selfish motive?

You're right, it is called being nice. But you don't have to be selfless to be nice. If I give a compliment because I want someone to like me, rather than because I want to make them feel good, is giving the compliment a bad act? Of course not. The effect of the compliment is ultimately the same regardless of the intention.

Selflessness, if we take it to mean 'an action with no potential net gain for the ourselves but with potential net gain for the other person', is synonymous with self-destructive. If that is the definition of selflessness, there are no selfless acts that are not self-destructive. If you believe all people to be of equal worth (including oneself), you'll agree that selflessness is not noble or logical.

Yes, even that, but I meant even as simple as not saying 'thank you' to a waiter or waitress just because it made your friend anxious, for example.

[Noblejanobii]

Just because people betray you, it doesn't mean that their allegiance was a potential gain at the time of the good deed. I'm not saying kindness is impossible. I'm just saying that nobody is kind without (potential) gain unless they are manipulated to do so (often by people who use the word 'selfish'). I can even show that giving money to poor people even when they dislike you is selfish - you give money to them because you believe it is right to (you admitted this), but the only reason you do that is because you want to a morally good person. Is that not itself a selfish motive?

You're right, it is called being nice. But you don't have to be selfless to be nice. If I give a compliment because I want someone to like me, rather than because I want to make them feel good, is giving the compliment a bad act? Of course not. The effect of the compliment is ultimately the same regardless of the intention.

Yes, even that, but I meant even as simple as not saying 'thank you' to a waiter or waitress just because it made your friend anxious.

There was never any potential advantage to me. I knew flat out what the consequences were going to be but I did it anyway because, guess what? I felt like it. And to answer your question, just because I'm religious does not mean I have any motives behind my kindness. I'm not the most religious person out there and I never think to myself "hey what can I do today that will make me a morally good person?" That's not something I do. If someone asks me for money I give it to them. Simple as that. Why does there have to be any advantage or motive behind it? Being a morally good person has nothing to do with this, or maybe it has everything to do with this because this is inherently a battle between evolution and religion, a circular argument with no true answer. So you can try to prove me wrong all you want but we're at a stalemate that cannot be breached.

That's called deceit. Doing something nice with an ulterior motive that is unclear at the presentation of the original intiation or soon after is keeping something from someone which is wrong. So while the compliment itself might not be mean, the fact that you haven't actually stated outright or at least made the intention clear in the first few exchanges is qualifying as deceit, which is wrong.

Hm… you know, I'll be honest, I'm not sure. Here's why. Firstly, I've never been in the situation so I can't give my proper reaction. Secondly, where I've been raised, it's second nature to say thank you and be polite like that. I believe I would try to be more careful about it around them but seeing as I just automatically respond in that way, it would be very difficult. However, I would not completely shut myself off from humanity even if the person wasn't around since that's not how I think and work. You said it yourself, humans are social creatures. Despite being effectively a slave to my peers, I enjoy being around other people. However, more often than not, I have found that the kindness that I share is hardly returned and my continual expression of it is based from my birth, raising, and past experiences, all factors than cannot be controlled nor used as motivation because, at best, you can claim that I was brainwashed, which, in effect, I was. In which case, if I was brainwashed then I would gain no advantage from any action I have ever done since none of my actions are my own but the decisions that are made others.

[Tenacity]

There was never any potential advantage to me. I knew flat out what the consequences were going to be but I did it anyway because, guess what? I felt like it. And to answer your question, just because I'm religious does not mean I have any motives behind my kindness. I'm not the most religious person out there and I never think to myself "hey what can I do today that will make me a morally good person?" That's not something I do. If someone asks me for money I give it to them. Simple as that. Why does there have to be any advantage or motive behind it? Being a morally good person has nothing to do with this, or maybe it has everything to do with this because this is inherently a battle between evolution and religion, a circular argument with no true answer. So you can try to prove me wrong all you want but we're at a stalemate that cannot be breached.

That's called deceit. Doing something nice with an ulterior motive that is unclear at the presentation of the original intiation or soon after is keeping something from someone which is wrong. So while the compliment itself might not be mean, the fact that you haven't actually stated outright or at least made the intention clear in the first few exchanges is qualifying as deceit, which is wrong.

Hm… you know, I'll be honest, I'm not sure. Here's why. Firstly, I've never been in the situation so I can't give my proper reaction. Secondly, where I've been raised, it's second nature to say thank you and be polite like that. I believe I would try to be more careful about it around them but seeing as I just automatically respond in that way, it would be very difficult. However, I would not completely shut myself off from humanity even if the person wasn't around since that's not how I think and work. You said it yourself, humans are social creatures. Despite being effectively a slave to my peers, I enjoy being around other people. However, more often than not, I have found that the kindness that I share is hardly returned and my continual expression of it is based from my birth, raising, and past experiences, all factors than cannot be controlled nor used as motivation because, at best, you can claim that I was brainwashed, which, in effect, I was. In which case, if I was brainwashed then I would gain no advantage from any action I have ever done since none of my actions are my own but the decisions that are made others.

I just want to clear the air first, before I begin my point. The most important thing is this - I've no intention to prove you wrong, nor do I particularly care for proving you wrong. The reason I get into these discussions isn't to win internet points, but to see how my own beliefs stand up to reality. By having these conversations, one day I might come across a point or a piece of evidence that causes me to doubt my own beliefs. This is a good thing. I have these conversations because I find them interesting, and because I hope both parties walk away from the conversation as better people.

The second point I want to clear up is the religion part. I never mentioned religion anywhere in my posts, although I can see why it would be relevant as many people believe religion to be the basis of morality (which is demonstrably untrue, as evidenced by the scores of morally decent atheists). I also do not think evolution and religion are in conflict, unless you deny that evolution is fact because of your religion.

If someone asks you for money, you give it to them, no matter what? Why?

Deceit is when you present a false side of yourself to someone. The example I gave you wasn't necessarily deceit. If I gave an insincere compliment to you, that would be deceit. Deceit has nothing to do with intentions.

I'm not asking for a reaction necessarily, I'm asking for what you think the right thing to do is. I have been in the situation, and my first reaction was to do as my friend wanted, because I didn't want them to be sad (which would risk our friendship). If you say you'll do what your friend wants, you're ultimately putting your own worth beneath that person's feelings because doing so is harmful to you. If you believe all people are equal, such a behaviour is contradictory to that belief. If, however, you say you won't do what your friend wants, your friend can easily claim that you are being selfish. For this reason I don't see the word 'selfish' as a word with any moral weight anymore. It's morally neutral. It was selfish of me to take a shower this morning - no one benefitted but me. That doesn't mean the act of the shower was immoral, but just because it's not immoral doesn't mean it's not selfish.

I guess my point ultimately is that I don't see humanity as an inherently bad thing just because we can be selfish. It's not our selfish intentions that matter but the outcomes of our actions, because outcomes are the only thing that truly shape the world.

We've all been 'brainwashed' if that's how you want to put it. Some of us just get luckier than others, it seems.

EDIT: I realise I haven't really gave an opinion on the Wilde quote at hand here. I'll just say that I think what he's saying is true for goals that end upon achievement, but goals that require constant work to maintain (such as health, wealth, happiness, etc.) do not result in tragedy. So he's both right and wrong in a sense. Interestingly the latter type of goals are often the ones held most highly in society.

[Chibi Altaria]

@Fate YOU WIN. FOR NOW. *puts on shades* I guess your luck with the raffles is turning around! xD

[Noblejanobii]

I just want to clear the air first, before I begin my point. The most important thing is this - I've no intention to prove you wrong, nor do I particularly care for proving you wrong. The reason I get into these discussions isn't to win internet points, but to see how my own beliefs stand up to reality. By having these conversations, one day I might come across a point or a piece of evidence that causes me to doubt my own beliefs. This is a good thing. I have these conversations because I find them interesting, and because I hope both parties walk away from the conversation as better people.

The second point I want to clear up is the religion part. I never mentioned religion anywhere in my posts, although I can see why it would be relevant as many people believe religion to be the basis of morality (which is demonstrably untrue, as evidenced by the scores of morally decent atheists). I also do not think evolution and religion are in conflict, unless you deny that evolution is fact because of your religion.

If someone asks you for money, you give it to them, no matter what? Why?

Deceit is when you present a false side of yourself to someone. The example I gave you wasn't necessarily deceit. If I gave an insincere compliment to you, that would be deceit. Deceit has nothing to do with intentions.

I'm not asking for a reaction necessarily, I'm asking for what you think the right thing to do is. I have been in the situation, and my first reaction was to do as my friend wanted, because I didn't want them to be sad (which would risk our friendship). If you say you'll do what your friend wants, you're ultimately putting your own worth beneath that person's feelings because doing so is harmful to you. If you believe all people are equal, such a behaviour is contradictory to that belief. If, however, you say you won't do what your friend wants, your friend can easily claim that you are being selfish. For this reason I don't see the word 'selfish' as a word with any moral weight anymore. It's morally neutral. It was selfish of me to take a shower this morning - no one benefitted but me. That doesn't mean the act of the shower was immoral, but just because it's not immoral doesn't mean it's not selfish.

I guess my point ultimately is that I don't see humanity as an inherently bad thing just because we can be selfish. It's not our selfish intentions that matter but the outcomes of our actions, because outcomes are the only thing that truly shape the world.

We've all been 'brainwashed' if that's how you want to put it. Some of us just get luckier than others, it seems.

That relaxes me a little. Where I live the main point in discussion isn't to just discuss, it's to prove superiority. Very rarely do I get to have philosophical discussion. More often than not, since I'm very blatant about my beliefs, I am put on the defensive and I've taken to not backing down no matter what the stakes in an argument since that's exactly what I must do to survive where I live. It's an instinct I guess. I apologize if you took

I do deny evolution because of my religion but that's an argument that I'd rather not get into because I have a very painful past with that argument that almost resulted into a physical fight between a biology teacher and myself. I'm not saying morality only stems from religion because in my experience, the most moral of people don't have a religion. However, I do think they can be associated.

Within reason. When I go to New York or Las Vegas I don't hand out twenties to people on the side of the street. But in my high school, yeah sure. They usually don't ask for more than two dollars a week and most of the time I don't give out more than like ten dollars in about two weeks time. They actually haven't ask me for money in about two months so it's not like it's happened entirely recently. If I had to guess (and I really mean guess since there's no clear source), I think it has to do with the fact that when I was in middle school, people claimed to be Christians but then they'd spit and kick and hurt other people who were less fortunate than they were. I was one of those people (and I suffer many scars physically, emotionally, and mentally from the trauma). So when I changed schools, I ended up sliding into the more fortunate position and I quickly came to realize just how bad people around me had it. I can give numerous examples of times I bought people dinner, gave them rides home, gave them money, etc. because I saw what they were facing. They came to school with bruises, they didn't get to eat more than one meal a day, they have to walk ten miles to a bus stop at five in the morning. I saw that and I guess it made me realize, that's not okay. Someone has to show them some kind of kindness, because obviously no one else is. It's not to make me feel good, it's not to make me feel better or gain allies, it's to show them that there are people out there who care for them, even if they don't reciprocate the feeling. If I could tell all the things I've witnessed, it's a pretty depressing story, and I know that the people I show kindness to have faced much worse.

It does actually. Deceit steams from false pretenses and, while you are correct, showing a false side of yourself qualifies as that, it's not wholly that either.

What's the quote from Animal Farm? Some people are equal, but some are more equal than others. I believe everyone is equal, but I believe, when in conflict of interests, put the interests of the other before you. I actually spoke with a priest (my boss) on the way out of work today and he explained it like this. Yes, everyone is selfish. Every decision we make that is not made through trusting God and merely satisfying a need, is selfish. We are imperfect beings since we have been afflicted by sin and, therefore, are subject to wants and desires. Every time we make a conscious decision to satisfy our own desire, that is selfish. You taking a shower this morning? That can be classified as a need because of the need for good hygiene to be sick. But taking your mother's body wash to make yourself small nice when you take that shower? That's selfish. The next level, the type of selflessness you've been describing is actually merely a lack of selfishness. A lack of selfishness is when someone does something selfless, but they must consider before they actually perform the act, or they have some motive to gain something from their selfless act. It's a sort of inbetween. While the term, in itself, is actually a paradox, it pretty much means you have to make a conscious decision to be selfless or you're being selfless for your own selfish gains. Both situations apply. Selfless, as he described it, better fits what I was describing with my money situation. It means acting without a second thought to sacrifice something of your own with no regard for anything in return. If something is gained in return, that does not nullify the selflessness, as the gain was not the purpose of the sacrifice in the first place. Now, this is taken from the Roman Catholic perspective, but I still feel this somewhat applies to what we were saying since it almost has three stages to it, and pretty much, we were both correct. While selflessness does indeed exist, it is nearly impossible to achieve due to the fact that nearly every decision a person makes is selfish.

I mean, the priest that runs the church I work at literally just said pretty much any decision you make is selfish so I don't think it's all bad inherently in itself. I think it's more of, when you put your own desires ahead of someone else's, that's when I think selfishness hits the danger zone.

There is truth to this.

[Tenacity]

I suppose if you believe in a religion the default position to whether or not all behaviours are selfish is no.

I will say though that I think it odd to give money to people who bring down your life. Good behaviours need to be rewarded, and bad behaviours need to be discouraged - that's how functional societies work. So to do the reverse just instinctually seems strange, I guess.

Interesting discussion!

[Noblejanobii]

I suppose if you believe in a religion the default position to whether or not all behaviours are selfish is no.

I will say though that I think it odd to give money to people who bring down your life. Good behaviours need to be rewarded, and bad behaviours need to be discouraged - that's how functional societies work. So to do the reverse just instinctually seems strange, I guess.

Interesting discussion!

Again, a priest said this. That's about as religious as you can get in some places.

I mean I'm probably encouraging them to freeload but I've witnessed some sick stuff so I think they deserve some joy in their life. Everyone's entitled to happiness.

Indeed!