Selfishness and Human Nature

Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

Slingin Sammy 33
07-23-2009, 12:27 PM
In some of the healthcare threads, the concept of man’s innate selfishness was bandied about. This post started out as an addendum to one of my interminably long health care posts (Hey- In my defense, I was mocked for simply taking random jabs). I thought the concept interesting and applicable to a much broader range of concepts and, rather, than dilute an already lengthy post, I pulled this out and thought a new thread might be interesting. It’s offseason rambling but, hey, a little self-examination never hurt anybody. If no one finds it of interest, it will die a quick death. As I really haven’t read/examined Freud and the whole “Id/Ego” thing, I may be going over things that are much more well developed by individuals much more intelligent than myself.

Also - There is a real question at the end of all this so don’t think this is just some random lecture.

In much of the health care debate the role of “selfishness” was debated and assertions as to the selfish nature of man were bandied about. Essentially, it seemed to me that people kept asserting "People are inherently selfish" - whether it's in the id/ego thing or in the realm of spiritual/instinctual discussion. Throughout, the concept that, by nature, people are inherently “selfish” seemed generally accepted. i.e. – A person will inherently place their own needs/desires over the needs and desires of others even if doing so would be detrimental to others.

-- I disagree.

IMO - people are inherently self-interested not selfish. Further, healthy self interest does not require that an individual place his interests above those of others. Rather, to me, self-interest equates more to self-awareness: knowledge that I exist and I am distinct. This self-interest, in turn, allows us to ultimately understand the needs of others. Aware of these needs and based on them, people often chose to place the needs of other above their own.

I believe all healthy humans past the age of about 2 have a strong dose of self-awareness - ask my 2 year old daughter she is in the "MINE!!" stage. In fact, my daughter’s instinctual behavior – claiming all things are hers and exhibiting possessive behavior of those things - would seem to be a strong indication of innate selfishness. Even at this young age, however, she is willing to share things that are “hers”. The sharing comes only after you acknowledge that it is hers to give. It seems to me that the acts of possession, rather than exhibiting an intent to place her desires above others, is an attempt to demonstrate to others that she has desires and needs. My six year old son, although entering his petulant phase, went through this “mine” stage also and emerged from it with consistent desire to place the desires of others above his own. My wife and I have always tried to nurtured this trait, but I would suggest he displayed both empathy and sympathy towards others at an early age and that it came to him just as naturally as did his desire to possess things.

In his desire to assist others who seemed sad, Aidan often chose an item dear to him, or one that would make him happy, as an offering to the sad person (I don’t believe him to be unique in this trait as I have seen it exhibited many other youngsters at that age). Further, although the people he most often choose to share with were family or friends, these “random acts of kindness” were not limited to individuals who would or had provided him love, support or gifts i.e. the actions did not appear to be driven by quid pro quo intent – in fact, he seemed blissfully unaware that some might expect to get a return on kindness given. Rather, the drive behind his actions appeared to be – “Are they unhappy? If so, they must need something. I will give them something that makes me happy even though it will make ME sad to lose it.” In these instances, it was his self-awareness as to what made HIM happy that influenced his choice on how to make others happy. Thus, rather than an exhibition in selfishness, his “mine” phase seemed to help understand the concept of need/want and the consequences when needs/wants were denied.

As adults, our self-awareness is much more heightened. We have a better understanding of our needs whether they be physical, material, spiritual, intellectual, etc. Likewise, I would suggest, we also have a more developed understanding of others needs. Rather than some instinctual “my needs take priority”, I suggest we go through our lives balancing our own needs against the needs of others and often choose to place the needs of others before ourselves. We make these choices because of our self awareness and the driving force in resolving these decisions is not “selfishness” - though it may be. I can think of many extreme and not so extreme examples of individuals making sacrifices without any hope, thought or expectation of recompense (either monetary, spiritual or other).

In that we are born requiring others to care for us, it may be that rather than an innate selfishness, we become aware at an early age of the giving by others. As we age and our self awareness grows, we recognize – at some level - the incredible acts of selflessness and sacrifice that were required to maintain our existence. Isn’t it possible, rather than innate selfishness, that through generations and generations of parental (and at the dawn of time, tribal) sacrifice it became ingrained in us that survival depends on giving? To me, the idea of selfishness and its effect on our decision making is much more easily transferred in society than that the concept of unrecompensed self-sacrifice.

I guess my question is this – and maybe there is a Freudian explanation: If we are innately selfish, how did the concept of “self sacrifice without recompense” come into existence? In that, by definition, such actions would be contrary to our most fundamental programming. How could we learn them? Again, if selfishness is innate, how could total selflessness ever be learned -- or even contemplated as a desired behavior?

My father taught me: Do good because it is the right thing to do, not for any expectation of a return. If he and I are innately selfish, what possible benefit to either of us was gained by this lesson?


Ramblings over.C'mon dude, puff, puff, pass. :cool-smil

Just kidding. Good post. Kids really do make you look at things, think about things and put things into perspective that you never did before. Like me, I have a 16 yr. old and I'm looking into ways to control the urge to push him out the car door while we're driving down the interstate.

JoeRedskin
07-23-2009, 12:49 PM
Kids really do make you look at things, think about things and put things into perspective that you never did before. Like me, I have a 16 yr. old and I'm looking into ways to control the urge to push him out the car door while we're driving down the interstate.

Okay. That one made me laugh out loud.

When some friends of mine recently mentioned how scary it is being a parent, I replied: "The only things that really scare me about being a parent are when son begins to drive and my daughter begins to date."

JoeRedskin
07-23-2009, 01:00 PM
Going further, I think that the concept of the human nature can run the whole gamut. A person can at his natural core may have any shade of inate selflessness or selfishness, the extreme examples of Ghandi/Mother Theresa are easily balanced by the extreme selfish acts we here on the news, such as a man throwing a baby off a bridge, or out a moving car. Society's role is to help seek a normalization and balance of those two extremes. (One might say that society would be best if we all were Ghandis, but truth is for government and community to work there has to be some natural self interest, or else wolves and predators would abuse the rest of the society - the one cult that drank the kool-aid is an example of that)

I am not sure if it is a direct quote, but Aristotle said something like "If everyone were friends, then we would not need a government". If all the members of a society were Ghandi's/Mother Theresa's then there wouldn't be a need for government b/c no predators would exist within the society. I guess even in such a society, however, the corporate whole would somehow have to provide for the common defense against external predators.

firstdown
07-23-2009, 01:25 PM
You said that you use to help repair people's homes but the last two didn't thank you enough so you stopped.

Hmmm...I deliver meals to the eldery on Sunday, Meals on Wheels, the first guy on my route either swears at me or throws the food on the ground when I deliver it. Don't ask me why he is just grumpy. What if I just said screw this no one cares, will then the next 13 people on my route would probably go hungry that day.

We only did it for three years and the first person was not home when we showed up to fix up the out side of their home. The next two years the people very rude and ticked off some of our members who said that was the last time they were doing that. The board agreed so we decided not to do it the following year. I'm sure if all 14 people would swear at you and throw the food down you would at some point decide its probably not worth the effort. In our case it just seemed that all the people we tried helping did not appriciate the fact that we took our Saturday to help them improve their home and we never got evne a thank you from any of them. The best part was the 2nd year the people never even came out of their home until lunch showed up and then they came out fixed a plate and went right back in without saying a word to anyone. What your doing is a great cause and I did that a few times with my grandfather who did meals on wheels 3 times a week.

FRPLG
07-23-2009, 01:27 PM
I earnestly believe we act of base selfishness/self-interest/whateveryouwannacallit. Even when the recompense is externally imperceptible the inner(or spiritual to use Joe's lexicon) return is never negative. No one acts in such a way that the return is entirely negative. And to me if there is any positive then it is an act of self-interest.

Even Joe's postulation near the end of his original post requires that one is merely providing self-sacrifice "not for nothing". If it indeed has become genetically ingrained in us...or even environmentally ingrained in us that sacrifice is indeed required for survival then by definition that byproduct of self-sacrifice isn't nothing. It provides survival.

I don't think our selfishness must necessarily be exhibited in conscious ways (although it certainly can be). On the contrary I think our innate (the kind that really matters in this discussion) is essentially one of survival, and a comfotable one at that. Every single act can be traced back to that.

I take care of my daughter. Why? I love her. Why? Why do we care for others? Innately why do we care? Remember nothing we do is magic. It is all controlled by our brains. Actions, emotions, words all come from our brain. There's a logic to us. An incredibly complex perhaps incomprehensible logic but logic nonetheless. And that logic, that equation, has a function. Survival.

Wow we really need football season to start...but I love this kind of discussion. Trying to answer unanswerable questions.

mredskins
07-23-2009, 01:54 PM
We only did it for three years and the first person was not home when we showed up to fix up the out side of their home. The next two years the people very rude and ticked off some of our members who said that was the last time they were doing that. The board agreed so we decided not to do it the following year. I'm sure if all 14 people would swear at you and throw the food down you would at some point decide its probably not worth the effort. In our case it just seemed that all the people we tried helping did not appriciate the fact that we took our Saturday to help them improve their home and we never got evne a thank you from any of them. The best part was the 2nd year the people never even came out of their home until lunch showed up and then they came out fixed a plate and went right back in without saying a word to anyone. What your doing is a great cause and I did that a few times with my grandfather who did meals on wheels 3 times a week.

Now everyone in that program was ungratful????

You first said:

Our club use to do that Paint Your Heart Out thing where you go to someones home and fix up the out side but we dropped that because the last two times we did that the people seem so ungrateful it was almost depressing knowing how hard we worked to help them out.

That makes it sound like everyone else was fine and thankful. I am starting to think you are just a negative nancy for the sake of it. You are starting to move into Hess and SBF country to me.

firstdown
07-23-2009, 02:31 PM
Now everyone in that program was ungratful????

You first said:

Our club use to do that Paint Your Heart Out thing where you go to someones home and fix up the out side but we dropped that because the last two times we did that the people seem so ungrateful it was almost depressing knowing how hard we worked to help them out.

That makes it sound like everyone else was fine and thankful. I am starting to think you are just a negative nancy for the sake of it. You are starting to move into Hess and SBF country to me.

Ok maybe I sould have worded it better but like I said the first time we did this the person was not even home. So I sound like a negative nancy because I don't care to help people who are ungrateful.Ok, then I'm a negative nancy.

I'm sure the program has helped alot of people that are very grateful for what is done but or experience was not very good.

FRPLG
07-23-2009, 02:35 PM
Ok maybe I sould have worded it better but like I said the first time we did this the person was not even home. So I sound like a negative nancy because I don't care to help people who are ungrateful.Ok, then I'm a negative nancy.

No. You're selfish. Just like everyone else. Some of the value you get out of helping people is derived from their gratitude. You acquire a sense of importance to them from that. It makes you feel good. When they're not grateful, or just don't show it, then you are deprived that emotion and it becomes not worth it to you.

mredskins
07-23-2009, 02:40 PM
No. You're selfish. Just like everyone else. Some of the value you get out of helping people is derived from their gratitude. You acquire a sense of importance to them from that. It makes you feel good. When they're not grateful, or just don't show it, then you are deprived that emotion and it becomes not worth it to you.


Damn!

Firstdown= Owned

Nice post FRPLG.

Schneed10
07-23-2009, 03:07 PM
In a way, doing something just for the benefit of others, does benefit you.

You do get something out of going to the soup kitchen on Thanksgiving and helping out the homeless - you get to feel good about yourself for the good deed you did. Even if you're not thanked or recognized by anybody for it.

There are those of us who draw a lot of personal satisfaction from doing charity, it's the personal sense of satisfaction that keeps us coming back to help time after time.

In a way, being selfless is selfish, just like everything else.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum