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.