Speaker Geeks! discussion

Ooh, this reminds me of Divergent. I'm coming back to this when I'm not as tired and can give a decent answer. I know what I want to say, just not how to word it, and I'm commenting so I'll get a notification.

Well humans are naturally selfish. Because the main person in our life is us. I read a article on how much we think about ourselves and the percentages went something like this (It's not exact, but I'll check later): 70% on ourselves 25% on our social interactions and 5% on other people.

But that was off topic.

Even altruism is usually because of underlying selfish wants. But that is simply the ID speaking subconsciously. So if we are always selfish, are we actually being selfish?

Sorry, I just asked more questions without answering yours. Whoops. :P

Keeping your hair isnt selfish. It's your body, and no one has any right to tell you what to do with it.

Aren't we naturally selfish? Isn't our survival a higher priority that that of others'? To me having surplus is like making sure you'll always have enough to survive, even when you're hit with a loss. That being said, selfishness is harmful in larger amounts. Nobody should be hoarding billions of dollars/pounds/euros for themselves.

I beleive that when you care for your individual needs, goals and desires, without damaging, offending or putting others into danger, you're not being selfish. Even more, I beleive it's not ethic not to care for yourself first (because when you don't, others have to, and that is selfish, oblying other/s to take care of you when you're completely capable of doing so)

I believe in acts of selflessness, but I also believe in our own rights to decline certain things without having the title of selfishness brought onto us. To not donate a kidney...I would not call that selfish. That person would be giving their entire life up because in loss of one kidney would result in having to be cautious your entire life.
It is not selfish to take that into account.

Selfish acts are not always derived from big things. Giving up your hair? That CAN be a lot to ask and if the person says no, it doesn't deem them selfish because hey, they could be taking in all the cons and impacts that choice will decide.

But I would like to turn the question around. Is it selfish to ask someone for their kidney? Hair? To give everything up? I find it interesting really, to think along those lines.

We all should do acts of selflessness, but some things can be ours. It isn't a selfish thing to say no sometimes. It's when we choose to be selfish, that's selfish; when we have that little voice come into our heads and tells us the right thing to do and we rebel against it. whether it is for power, or pride, etc. So to answer the question, no. Giving up huge things in life such as a kidney or everything you know is not selfish, but it's when it's done anyway that's selfless.

Thank you.

I think sometimes it's okay to be selfish. For example, if you were stuck in a relationship you didn't want to be, then I think you should be able to be a little selfish and break up with your partner. But on other things, such as raping people to get yourself some pleasure, should not be happening.

Lo wrote: "I think sometimes it's okay to be selfish. For example, if you were stuck in a relationship you didn't want to be, then I think you should be able to be a little selfish and break up with your part..."

I don't necessarily think that it would be selfish to break up with someone if you aren't happy in the relationship because who's to say that your partner isn't equally unhappy? By breaking up, you're giving both yourself and your partner the chance to have other happier relationships rather than being stuck in one where one or both of the people is miserable. I'm not really sure that this is worded exactly the way I want it to be, but hopefully y'all will catch my drift.

Selfishism (not a word but for the purposes of this I shall make it one) is when you put yourself first. You are an egoist and when making any kind of decision be it an ethical one or what you want to go and watch at the movies. You have an enlarged ego and a super super ego. That means going by Freud you don't have much of a conscience.

Evan wrote: "Selfishism (not a word but for the purposes of this I shall make it one) is when you put yourself first. You are an egoist and when making any kind of decision be it an ethical one or what you want..."
Evan, I studied Freud for many years and your statement is way misinterpreted. First, there are these three shares of your conscience system: the Ego (self), the Id (dark/unspohen desires, sometimes even inconscient) and the SuperEGo (that's the boundaries, the society standard or conscience in a judgemental/moral meananing). According to Freud, the selfish part of our personality is mostly represented by the Id, but it's leashed by opression the SuperEgo, and the way we behave is pruduced by the struggle of these two strong forces. And being selfish is natural to the human kind, as we are individuals after all; being an egotist, on the other hand, is different of being selfish, being much more related to the Vanity and self image. I strongly recommend you to read the entire oeuvre of both Freud and Jung to whom some of these issues are also related.

Carrie wrote: "Evan wrote: "Selfishism (not a word but for the purposes of this I shall make it one) is when you put yourself first. You are an egoist and when making any kind of decision be it an ethical one or ..."

Sorry I know bits of it are wrong, I do know it in a little more detail but I couldn't find my E.P notes on him. I found Butler but that was all I could find to do with conscience I have an amazing Ethics teacher and I once knew what you said but in the end it was a module I chose not to do. So bits of it my have become deluded. I think my brain just reads and formulates things the way I think makes more sense to me. Which is probably selfish.

Leah wrote: "Lo wrote: "I think sometimes it's okay to be selfish. For example, if you were stuck in a relationship you didn't want to be, then I think you should be able to be a little selfish and break up wit..."

That's true, but most of the time when you're breaking up with somebody it's because you're keeping in mind what's best for you. Sometimes it is the other way around, and that would be an act of selflessness. And let's say you guys were both unhappy in the relationship--are you talking about a mutual breakup?

Yeah, I guess you could call it that. I'm not exactly, shall we say, experienced in the department of relationships, so I'm just guessing that it COULD happen.

Leah wrote: "Yeah, I guess you could call it that. I'm not exactly, shall we say, experienced in the department of relationships, so I'm just guessing that it COULD happen."

Yeah, of course. But even when it's mutual (actually mutual, where both sides want to call it quits, not when they call it mutual but really one person didn't want to break up) it's usually because the two people are thinking about themselves.

(I'm not experienced either. I don't think half of us are :p)

I guess that's true... :)

Evan wrote: "Carrie wrote: "Evan wrote: "Selfishism (not a word but for the purposes of this I shall make it one) is when you put yourself first. You are an egoist and when making any kind of decision be it an ..."

No problem, Evan. I guess that is a great incentive for you to read more about the subject! :-)

Leah wrote: "Yeah, I guess you could call it that. I'm not exactly, shall we say, experienced in the department of relationships, so I'm just guessing that it COULD happen."

That's called 'inference'. A great path to follow when you choose to think "abstractly" about the matters!

H99 wrote: "Lo wrote: "Leah wrote: "Yeah, I guess you could call it that. I'm not exactly, shall we say, experienced in the department of relationships, so I'm just guessing that it COULD happen."

Yeah, of c..."

Sorry, H99, I do not agree. I beleive a little heterogeneity is always desirable - some of us have more acquaintances about the subjects, others less, a few 'shallow' opinions but we must all find our voices as we search for an argumentation line.

Without absolute selfishness, there will be enlightenment.
But the path of enlightenment is paved with selfish deeds. Even the zen mentality dwells in the mist of self, hoping to clear the fog of thoughts till it achieves no-mind. 'True altruism' is not a function of self, it's a paradox; as conscientiously anything you do is invariably subjected to self. Your senses towards flowers is selfish. No zen mind ever been able to get rid of the 'sense' barrier. Every act, every thought is selfish...

Donate everything and feel good/bad, protect others...selfish
Stay neutral to everything, do nothing...selfish
Everything about relationships...selfish
endless list!

The depth of selfishness is visible when it obstructs others' selfish 'gains'. Socially, It's considered selflessness when it fulfills others' selfish needs (e.g, donations, social work), the hidden self satisfaction is cloaked with altruism. Viz: In relationships it's visible if the break up isn't mutual. If partner 'A' wants 'B' to be happy with whoever she/he wants, selfishness is not visible as it doesn't obstruct 'B''s selfish needs. But selfishness exists in A, in form of love. (:

@H99
Debates doesn't take age into account. Just like Chess. A 10 year old can ask questions even a professional philosopher cant answer. What's a professional/real debate anyway!? You can quote each of my line and still come with questions or statements that may falsify my claims. Thoughts have dimensions, when two different dimensions encounter, the debates become exciting. (:

Som wrote: "Without absolute selfishness, there will be enlightenment.
But the path of enlightenment is paved with selfish deeds. Even the zen mentality dwells in the mist of self, hoping to clear the fog of t..."

Excellent speech, Som.

^(whoa!) Thank you Carrie. (: