Why not be selfish?

[idav]

It is evil because you experience pain, and pain is the only source of 'bad' in moral sense. There is no such thing as pain as a whole.

You would be preventing someones pain which is the opposite of evil. A life for a life is zero sum.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

According to you.

No, to the whole moral basis.

I give no care if someone is selfless, but they are completely evil to themselves because they are self-disinterested, and that means pain to themselves, they are unsatisfied.

you dodged my point. Selfish actions are just as sacrificial. You either sacrifice a or b.

It's not sacrificial unless you lose pleasure and when you lose pleasure you experience pain, and pain is the moral basis of evil.

We're a social species whether you like it or not.

We can socialize... doesn't matter.

I feel pain when a friend is hurt or when a friend is taken from me. People close to you influence your feelings more than I think you realise. At least that's what I take from the last paragraph

Sure, they can, I feel pain when my parents are in pain, I'm not happy if they are not happy. But if I sacrifice myself to make them happy I WANT to make them happy, it's a selfish reason, and since it is selfish it is not altruistic.

a genius who works by himself can be surpassed by people who work together and share knowledge. Being an individual is good but learning team work is far more important.

"If you want something done right, do it yourself."

 

[The Sum of Awe]

You would be preventing someones pain which is the opposite of evil. A life for a life is zero sum.

We all have different pains and pleasures, so all that really matters is our individual pleasure and pain. You CAN gain pleasure from preventing someone's pain, but after you gain pleasure from it, it automatically is no longer altruistic.

But in most cases, you are experiencing pain, therefore if you sacrifice for someone you don't really care about, you are in pain, therefore are evil to yourself.

 

[9Westy9]

No, to the whole moral basis.

I give no care if someone is selfless, but they are completely evil to themselves because they are self-disinterested, and that means pain to themselves, they are unsatisfied.

So you'd high five someone who doesn't give to a beggar yet punch someone in the face who gives the beggar some change?

It's not sacrificial unless you lose pleasure and when you lose pleasure you experience pain, and pain is the moral basis of evil.

lose one pleasure to gain another. Choose which of the pleasures you want.

Sure, they can, I feel pain when my parents are in pain, I'm not happy if they are not happy. But if I sacrifice myself to make them happy I WANT to make them happy, it's a selfish reason, and since it is selfish it is not altruistic.

This undermines your previous paragraph. "thus it is not bad when your friend experiences pain, it's only bad to him."

"If you want something done right, do it yourself."

"and if you can't do it, get help"

 

[The Sum of Awe]

So you'd high five someone who doesn't give to a beggar yet punch someone in the face who gives the beggar some change?

For 1: That is not selflessness, they are doing it for a selfish reason. Therefore it's not altruistic

2: Even if you gave an example that was altruistic, I said:

"I give no care if someone is selfless,"

lose one pleasure to gain another. Choose which of the pleasures you want.

Dodged my point

This undermines your previous paragraph. "thus it is not bad when your friend experiences pain, it's only bad to him."

I was implying, if you didn't love your friend.

And you missed my point anyway, I was saying it isn't altruistic if you sacrificed for a friend that is in pain, because it is selfish, unless you don't care for your friends.

"and if you can't do it, get help"

 

[9Westy9]

For 1: That is not selflessness, they are doing it for a selfish reason. Therefore it's not altruistic

2: Even if you gave an example that was altruistic, I said:

"I give no care if someone is selfless,"

you don't care? Even though you find the action evil?

Dodged my point

So altruism has to involve pain now? Also being selfish IS a loss of pleasure.

I was implying, if you didn't love your friend.

And you missed my point anyway, I was saying it isn't altruistic if you sacrificed for a friend that is in pain, because it is selfish, unless you don't care for your friends.

no the action is altruism, just not pure altruism Altruism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[The Sum of Awe]

you don't care? Even though you find the action evil?

As I said, it's not me that finds it evil, it's themselves kinda... They don't get pleasure from it (if they did it wouldn't be altruism), and pleasure is the natural psychological basis of good. They are inferior to their own morals.

So altruism has to involve pain now? Also being selfish IS a loss of pleasure.

Well, the lack of pleasure at least. So I guess the lack of good.

Why is selfish a loss of pleasure?

no the action is altruism, just not pure altruism Altruism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From that article you linked

Altruism is a motivation to provide something of value to a party who must be anyone but the self, while duty focuses on a moral obligation towards a specific individual (for example, a god, a king), or collective (for example, a government). Pure altruism consists of sacrificing something for someone other than the self (e.g. sacrificing time, energy or possessions) with no expectation of any compensation or benefits, either direct, or indirect (for instance from recognition of the giving).

There is no other altruism other than what fits its definition which includes the word "selfless" and selfless means


Selflessness, the act of sacrificing ones own interest for the greater good

Although, IMO, there is no greater good, because you are the only one who defines good to yourself by pleasure senses

xD

 

[idav]

We all have different pains and pleasures, so all that really matters is our individual pleasure and pain.

This isn't always true. When helping people it doesn't matter how they feel about it. Like helping somebody who flipped their lid, or helping a child and people who may not know better.

You CAN gain pleasure from preventing someone's pain, but after you gain pleasure from it, it automatically is no longer altruistic.

I'm not talking about getting pleasure from it.

But in most cases, you are experiencing pain, therefore if you sacrifice for someone you don't really care about, you are in pain, therefore are evil to yourself.

Whether there is pain doesn't matter. A general respect and love for life is important. If I tried to save someone, it would be for the other person not for me, and I'm sure I'd like to survive, but whether I survived or not it would still be altruistic. The goal is prevention of death.

 

[Penumbra]

This is largely aimed at people who either don't believe in an afterlife or at least don't believe in punishment/reward in the afterlife.

Ok.

If you only get one shot at life, why care what people think of you when you're gone?

I don't care what people think of me when I'm gone.

Leaving a legacy of peace and kindness won't mean a jot to you if you cease to exist and will ultimately be forgotten by either the passage of time or the inevitable apocalyptic demise of our species.

Ok.

Why not devote your life to yourself?

Frankly, I think the distinction between devoting one's life to oneself and devoting one's life to others is an illusion to begin with.

Why not be utterly ruthless in the pursuit of power and wealth, look out only for yourself and your loved ones and let all others be damned?

Diminishing returns.

Ruthlessness conflicts with my instincts and therefore results in unease. Why would I pursue ruthlessness when it means pursuing dissatisfaction?

Why not strike a balance between self preservation and satisfying your desires and leave any concept of morality out of the equation?

And what if desires include morality?

Why care about any concept of honesty, honour or decency if it's ultimately futile?

Why care about wealth or power when it's ultimately futile?

With no threat of punishment, no promise of reward and no material gain or loss after death, why not be selfish?

Because I find it unsatisfying. Furthermore, sometimes altruism is the path of success anyway.

People generally prefer to do business with and have relationships with people they view as trustworthy and balanced.

For those wondering, this isn't a smug "I'm a theist and thus morally superior" argument. I do my best to live the lifestyle I described. I just honestly don't understand why anybody would follow conventional notions of morality and decency when there is ultimately nothing to be gained from it. I don't get why people feel they should be "good".

I don't really understand why people pursue other things, but if they want to, then they can go for it.

If people that self-describe their efforts as purely selfish become obstacles in my own pursuits, however, I will take them down if need be, and it becomes a contest I suppose. As it so occurs, I generally win those contests, primarily because for whatever reason, such people tend to have fewer friends.

Oh one more thing, I can completely understand staying within the law so as to avoid punishment and I'm not suggesting being obnoxious to everybody you meet (which in my opinion is actually counterproductive). This is more along the lines of if you could steal money and not be caught, why wouldn't you do it? If you could backstab a co-worker to get a raise what's stopping you?

Because that's not an accurate expression of who I consider myself to be at any given moment.

 

[wubs23]

Because you (most likely) leave your genetics behind in the form of kids.

And you want these genes to have the highest possible chance of succeeding.

 

[9Westy9]

As I said, it's not me that finds it evil, it's themselves kinda... They don't get pleasure from it (if they did it wouldn't be altruism), and pleasure is the natural psychological basis of good. They are inferior to their own morals.

I don't find altruism evil. Even if I'm the one doing it. There's a difference between good, bad and evil. Sacrificing myself would be bad for myself but not evil.

Well, the lack of pleasure at least. So I guess the lack of good.

Why is selfish a loss of pleasure?

because if you're selfish you lose the pleasure of helping someone less fortunate than yourself.

From that article you linked

There is no other altruism other than what fits its definition which includes the word "selfless" and selfless means

Selflessness, the act of sacrificing ones own interest for the greater good

Although, IMO, there is no greater good, because you are the only one who defines good to yourself by pleasure senses

The greater good is whatever you want it to be. Some people can sacrifice their own selfish desires for a good above there own desire. For example, I might not want to help people at a community centre but I could sacrifice my time to help the people there improve themselves.

 

[Erebus]

Then, without trying to sound condescending, you obviously haven't thought about it very much.

Fallen at the first hurdle I'm afraid. Never mind though, I'll try to remain civil.
I'd wager I've considered this topic in far more detail than the majority of people, it is after all something I have to assess daily.

It doesn't take any deep philosophical underpinnings to look at other people and come to the conclusion "hey, maybe I should treat these people in a manner that I would like to be treated myself".

The golden rule seems to be the norm, as such it's the easiest conclusion to reach. I disagree with that conclusion though, I would argue the vast majority of people don't warrant such respect. Again as I said in the OP, I'm not talking about cruelty for its own sake, it has to serve a purpose.

The reasons behind this are a multitude. Humans are social animals, and what is better for the herd is also (in most cases) better for the individual.

This is a reasonable response, the rest was little more than a rant.

Basic human empathy. Look it up.

Duly noted.


I'll accept I was heavy handed in the way I phrased the OP, though the underlying message would remain the same. I've not slept in three days so I'm not my usual charming self at the moment. I would however ask that those who responded to the effect of "the amoral tend to lack friends" or "You would alienate everybody around you" consider the fact that it's quite simple to act whatever part you want for people. It's incredibly easy to seem intimidating to one person and adorable to another.

It seems to me that most pro-morality arguments stem from one of three arguments:
Firstly it should be pleasurable to be altruistic. This I can certainly understand in relation to loved ones and friends, but not to humanity as a whole.
Secondly there is a social imperative to be moral. Again I agree, though not in situations where you can "get away with it" so to speak (and no I'm not going to go into what I myself have or haven't done ). I see no reason to feel obligated towards a society that is just as easily preyed upon. Unfortunately there's no pretty way of phrasing that if I'm also going to be honest.
Thirdly there is an inherently desirable and correct way to live. I don't believe in good and evil, only what's desirable and what isn't desirable. Obviously this can drastically differ from one person to the next.

Perhaps at some point in my life I'll be ashamed of what I've said here (just getting some sleep will make me less cranky for a start). Maybe it'll be becoming a parent, falling in love or just waking up one day and seeing something in people I don't currently process. Maybe, maybe not. Who knows?
Until then, this rings true:

Sometimes it is more enjoyable to be cruel than to be kind, in my experience.

I suspect everybody has some form of sadistic streak, no matter how deeply buried it might be. Maybe I'm too negative in my views on other people, but I suspect many people don't want to accept that every so often they just want to burst that snot-nosed little kid's brand new balloon. :angel2:

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I suspect everybody has some form of sadistic streak, no matter how deeply buried it might be. Maybe I'm too negative in my views on other people, but I suspect many people don't want to accept that every so often they just want to burst that snot-nosed little kid's brand new balloon. :angel2:

That, and sometimes, the means for the best help is to harm.

 

[markymark]

This is largely aimed at people who either don't believe in an afterlife or at least don't believe in punishment/reward in the afterlife.
If you only get one shot at life, why care what people think of you when you're gone? Leaving a legacy of peace and kindness won't mean a jot to you if you cease to exist and will ultimately be forgotten by either the passage of time or the inevitable apocalyptic demise of our species.
Why not devote your life to yourself? Why not be utterly ruthless in the pursuit of power and wealth, look out only for yourself and your loved ones and let all others be damned? Why not strike a balance between self preservation and satisfying your desires and leave any concept of morality out of the equation?
Why care about any concept of honesty, honour or decency if it's ultimately futile? With no threat of punishment, no promise of reward and no material gain or loss after death, why not be selfish?

For those wondering, this isn't a smug "I'm a theist and thus morally superior" argument. I do my best to live the lifestyle I described. I just honestly don't understand why anybody would follow conventional notions of morality and decency when there is ultimately nothing to be gained from it. I don't get why people feel they should be "good".


Oh one more thing, I can completely understand staying within the law so as to avoid punishment and I'm not suggesting being obnoxious to everybody you meet (which in my opinion is actually counterproductive). This is more along the lines of if you could steal money and not be caught, why wouldn't you do it? If you could backstab a co-worker to get a raise what's stopping you?

just a quick question do you worship satan , cause thats what Satanist believe ?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

just a quick question do you worship satan , cause thats what Satanist believe ?

Not all of them.

 

[markymark]

Not all of them.

not all of what ?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Fallen at the first hurdle I'm afraid. Never mind though, I'll try to remain civil.
I'd wager I've considered this topic in far more detail than the majority of people, it is after all something I have to assess daily.

I'll take your word for that, but you have to understand that being confronted by the question "if you don't believe in God - why don't you just do whatever the hell you like!" doesn't exactly fill me with the greatest confidence or respect for the person asking such a question. To me, it shows not just an ignorance of my poisition, but of human nature, psychology, sociology and society. The reasons are bloody obvious, and if there's one thing I can't stand it's being asked to give an obvious answer.

The golden rule seems to be the norm, as such it's the easiest conclusion to reach. I disagree with that conclusion though, I would argue the vast majority of people don't warrant such respect. Again as I said in the OP, I'm not talking about cruelty for its own sake, it has to serve a purpose.

Then I would say you're a little too cynical. The vast majority of people around the world undeniably deserve that kind of respect. The ********** just get more press. Don't write off the majority of people just because you tend to notice the alcoholic who kicked your cat more often than you notice the thousands of charity workers who didn't kick your cat. For every sneering prick you see on the street, you probably brushed shoulders with dozens of perfectly decent, considerate people who are just getting on with their lives.

I'll accept I was heavy handed in the way I phrased the OP, though the underlying message would remain the same. I've not slept in three days so I'm not my usual charming self at the moment. I would however ask that those who responded to the effect of "the amoral tend to lack friends" or "You would alienate everybody around you" consider the fact that it's quite simple to act whatever part you want for people. It's incredibly easy to seem intimidating to one person and adorable to another.

But it's quite hard to do that while simultanenously being a selfish jerk and doing selfish, jerky things.

It seems to me that most pro-morality arguments stem from one of three arguments:
Firstly it should be pleasurable to be altruistic. This I can certainly understand in relation to loved ones and friends, but not to humanity as a whole.

It really isn't that difficult to understand. If you can understand why you'd want to be altruistic towards loves ones, you should be able to understand the benefits of being altruistic to anybody. The exact same logic applies - you do what you do because making life just a little easier or happier for other people makes you feel better about yourself. That's not some sentimental nonsense either - it's psychology.

Secondly there is a social imperative to be moral. Again I agree, though not in situations where you can "get away with it" so to speak (and no I'm not going to go into what I myself have or haven't done ). I see no reason to feel obligated towards a society that is just as easily preyed upon. Unfortunately there's no pretty way of phrasing that if I'm also going to be honest.

Well, it's a good thing we live in a society that makes it incredibly difficult to "get away" with things, then. Society punishes things that harm it, and reward things that benefit it. If there existed some hypothetical scenario where you could absolutely escape punishment for something that harmed society, that doesn't mean you've committed some great moral heist or become the new ubermensch. You're still a selfish, immoral dick, you're just a selfish, immoral dick that happened to evade punishment.

Perhaps at some point in my life I'll be ashamed of what I've said here (just getting some sleep will make me less cranky for a start). Maybe it'll be becoming a parent, falling in love or just waking up one day and seeing something in people I don't currently process. Maybe, maybe not. Who knows?
Until then, this rings true:

I suspect everybody has some form of sadistic streak, no matter how deeply buried it might be. Maybe I'm too negative in my views on other people, but I suspect many people don't want to accept that every so often they just want to burst that snot-nosed little kid's brand new balloon. :angel2:

Or maybe not everyone is that emo.

I know, I know, low blow...

 

[Gjallarhorn]

not all of what ?

Not all Satanists worship Satan, or even believe in Satan as a real being.

 

[Erebus]

1.I'll take your word for that, but you have to understand that being confronted by the question "if you don't believe in God - why don't you just do whatever the hell you like!" doesn't exactly fill me with the greatest confidence or respect for the person asking such a question. To me, it shows not just an ignorance of my poisition, but of human nature, psychology, sociology and society. The reasons are bloody obvious, and if there's one thing I can't stand it's being asked to give an obvious answer.


2.Then I would say you're a little too cynical. The vast majority of people around the world undeniably deserve that kind of respect. The ********** just get more press. Don't write off the majority of people just because you tend to notice the alcoholic who kicked your cat more often than you notice the thousands of charity workers who didn't kick your cat. For every sneering prick you see on the street, you probably brushed shoulders with dozens of perfectly decent, considerate people who are just getting on with their lives.



3.But it's quite hard to do that while simultanenously being a selfish jerk and doing selfish, jerky things.


4.It really isn't that difficult to understand. If you can understand why you'd want to be altruistic towards loves ones, you should be able to understand the benefits of being altruistic to anybody. The exact same logic applies - you do what you do because making life just a little easier or happier for other people makes you feel better about yourself. That's not some sentimental nonsense either - it's psychology.


5.Well, it's a good thing we live in a society that makes it incredibly difficult to "get away" with things, then. Society punishes things that harm it, and reward things that benefit it. If there existed some hypothetical scenario where you could absolutely escape punishment for something that harmed society, that doesn't mean you've committed some great moral heist or become the new ubermensch. You're still a selfish, immoral dick, you're just a selfish, immoral dick that happened to evade punishment.


6.Or maybe not everyone is that emo.

Numbered your quotes to make replying easier.

1. I think you misunderstood the aim of the OP, which is probably my fault due to how I phrased some parts of it. Not only is it not aimed solely at atheists (some atheists believe in a reward/punishment afterlife and some theists do not) but it's also not necessarily straightforward to answer. Sure, if you believe there is right and wrong or good and evil then your answer is pretty much determined for you, but for those with an amoral approach morality can become more a case of cost/reward and thus require closer consideration.
It's a fairly similar question to "If you could steal £100,000 and not get caught, would you?" Though obviously my question refers to a lifestyle rather than a one of event.

2. Perhaps you're right. My opinion of other people is generally quite misanthropic, though if people do generally look for the best in others that puts me at an advantage no?

3. You'd be surprised. Awareness of body language and tone of voice can work wonders for hiding ulterior motives. Besides, even if you don't fancy acting all the time people have an attraction to narcissism, machiavellianism and psychopathy that seems to surpass what might reasonably be expected. James Bond for example didn't become so popular by being a nice guy.

4. I've studied the psychology so I'm well aware it doesn't actually apply to everybody. Altruism toward strangers can be useful for building bridges though, but only on occasion.

5. This is where risk/reward comes into play. Criminal behaviour isn't worth the risk in my opinion, but manipulation and deceit are incredibly effective if done well.
This was also interesting:

that doesn't mean you've committed some great moral heist or become the new ubermensch. You're still a selfish, immoral dick, you're just a selfish, immoral dick that happened to evade punishment.

One argument of the OP was that when your time is up what does it matter that you might be considered a saint? This also applies to the inverse.

6. You just don't understand the abyssal darkness of my weeping soul.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Numbered your quotes to make replying easier.

1. I think you misunderstood the aim of the OP, which is probably my fault due to how I phrased some parts of it. Not only is it not aimed solely at atheists (some atheists believe in a reward/punishment afterlife and some theists do not) but it's also not necessarily straightforward to answer. Sure, if you believe there is right and wrong or good and evil then your answer is pretty much determined for you, but for those with an amoral approach morality can become more a case of cost/reward and thus require closer consideration.
It's a fairly similar question to "If you could steal £100,000 and not get caught, would you?" Though obviously my question refers to a lifestyle rather than a one of event.

Ahh, I was a little too fiery, then. Sorry about that.

2. Perhaps you're right. My opinion of other people is generally quite misanthropic, though if people do generally look for the best in others that puts me at an advantage no?

I actually think we tend to look for the worst in others, since it's more important to us to identify something or someone as a threat than to recognize things or people which do not pose a threat. That's why you tend to be apprehensive about people who are very loud in public rather than those who are quietly going about their business, even though the quiet person could secretly be a complete psychopath.

3. You'd be surprised. Awareness of body language and tone of voice can work wonders for hiding ulterior motives. Besides, even if you don't fancy acting all the time people have an attraction to narcissism, machiavellianism and psychopathy that seems to surpass what might reasonably be expected. James Bond for example didn't become so popular by being a nice guy.

But morally ambiguous fictional characters have always fascinated people, and I don't think that we like them because of their negative qualities, but more because of how their negative qualities render a character that would otherwise be superhuman into a more relatable person. James Bond gets away with it because he saves the world, and is always put in contrast to the more morally objectionable villains he faces - so we naturally side with him. But if you met a guy like James Bond at, say, a friend's party you'd probably just think "God, what a total anus".

4. I've studied the psychology so I'm well aware it doesn't actually apply to everybody. Altruism toward strangers can be useful for building bridges though, but only on occasion.

It's not just about building bridges though. There are selfish motivations for helping people - we just get a sense of self-satisfaction from doing so.

5. This is where risk/reward comes into play. Criminal behaviour isn't worth the risk in my opinion, but manipulation and deceit are incredibly effective if done well.
This was also interesting:

One argument of the OP was that when your time is up what does it matter that you might be considered a saint? This also applies to the inverse.

It matters because we almost universally leave behind people we care about and who we, consequently, want to see us in a positive light. The general conensus among people is that we all want to leave this world having made it just a little bit better than the time we came into it, if not for ourselves then for others who live on after we die. It's a remnant of our hive-mind nature.

6. You just don't understand the abyssal darkness of my weeping soul.

Maybe not. Could you write some poetry?