|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Seanfu]
#13992557 - 02/19/11 09:46 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
All discussion here is subjective. Yet there is a preponderance of evidence out there that we always act in our own self interest first and foremost and no one has ever demonstrated that we do not.
This is as good as it's gonna get. If you choose to believe otherwise that's your business.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Icelander]
#13992602 - 02/19/11 09:52 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: This his how it seems to work in nature. I see this often in observing deer. When the danger becomes overwhelming she leaves off defending her young.
Sure, selfishness can beat out the altruistic drive in certain cases, but there are many examples where it does not. The spider Stegodyphus, for instance, will allow itself to be consumed by its offspring for food. Vervet monkeys will issue cries of alarm when a predator is seen, even though that decreases the chances of their individual survival. Animals do occasionally behave in ways that maximize the fitness of other individuals in the population at the expense of their own.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992645 - 02/19/11 09:58 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Could be, can you show a human example? And it would always be an unconscious motivation as far as I can see. And it would never be selfless as one is part of the species they are trying to preserve. So we are back to no selfless act even on an unconscious level.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Icelander]
#13992664 - 02/19/11 10:01 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
I've already given a human example: the mother sacrificing herself for her child. Any action where a human maximizes the fitness of other humans at the expense of their own is an altruistic action. The Buddhist monks who immolated themselves as a means of stopping their persecution by the South Vietnamese would also be performing altruistic, conscious actions by this definition.
As regards to selfless: if you're defining a selfless individual as one who acts with NO concern for themselves then I'd say this doesn't exist; there will always be an unconscious selfish drive. But at the same time there will always be an unconscious altruistic drive.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992706 - 02/19/11 10:09 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
I've already given a human example: the mother sacrificing herself for her child.
There is no way to determine why the mother is sacrificing herself. It may be because she thinks its the right thing to do.
In your example of the Buddhist they are imo doing it to satisfy their own belief system of how they should act and feel and that action brings them happiness and fulfillment. Back to self serving again. There is nothing about that act that I would consider selfless. Like someone giving their life for their country or maybe you consider that a selfless act too.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992715 - 02/19/11 10:10 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deCypher said: Any action where a human maximizes the fitness of other humans at the expense of their own is an altruistic action.
Since humans perform these actions, humans therefore can be altruistic. (Not to mention the several examples I listed from the animal kingdom.) I don't see how you can argue against this.
Quote:
Icelander said: There is nothing about that act that I would consider selfless.
Sure. My point is that it's still altruistic.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992740 - 02/19/11 10:16 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
NO.Altruism (pronounced /ˈæltruːɪzəm/) is selfless concern for the welfare of others.
It is not selfless if you are benefiting from it.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Icelander]
#13992750 - 02/19/11 10:18 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Do you or do you not agree that any action where a human maximizes the fitness of other humans at the expense of their own is an altruistic action? I'm not talking about selfless here as that concept implies the complete absence of a selfish drive, which as I previously agreed with you is unlikely to occur.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992756 - 02/19/11 10:19 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
I'm going by the second definition as stated by Merriam-Webster:
2: behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992761 - 02/19/11 10:20 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
No I don't agree. I posted the definition above. Altruism by definition means selfless.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Icelander]
#13992768 - 02/19/11 10:22 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Read above. The second definition doesn't use the concept selfless, so it's perfectly correct to say that humans, as well as animals, can behave altruistically.
Quote:
deCypher said: I'm not talking about selfless here as that concept implies the complete absence of a selfish drive, which as I previously agreed with you is unlikely to occur.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992780 - 02/19/11 10:23 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deCypher said: I'm going by the second definition as stated by Merriam-Webster:
2: behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species
And I'm saying there is a benefit to or for the doer. Either specifically or as in being a member of the species they are trying to save.
The term altruism may also refer to an ethical doctrine that claims that individuals are morally obliged to benefit others. Does this sound selfless?
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Icelander]
#13992791 - 02/19/11 10:24 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
But there IS no benefit to the spider who lets itself get eaten by its own young, or to the Buddhist monk who lights himself on fire. I don't think it's correct to say that they're somehow benefited just because they're a member of the species they're helping; no... instead they're benefiting the species to the detriment of themselves.
Quote:
Icelander said: The term altruism may also refer to an ethical doctrine that claims that individuals are morally obliged to benefit others. Does this sound selfless?
Well, going by that definition alone it says nothing about requiring that there is no benefit to the individual while benefiting others.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992850 - 02/19/11 10:35 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
How is the Monk benefiting the species? In the same way the patriot who dies for his country? They both are self satisfied by their actions and therefore equally self serving first and foremost. The fact that there is a secondary benefit to others is moot.
A spider is completely instinctual as far as I know and even any action in it's own behalf is instinctual.
Outside of pure instinct which is out of our control there are no selfless actions. Satisfied?
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992862 - 02/19/11 10:37 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deCypher said: But there IS no benefit to the spider who lets itself get eaten by its own young, or to the Buddhist monk who lights himself on fire. I don't think it's correct to say that they're somehow benefited just because they're a member of the species they're helping; no... instead they're benefiting the species to the detriment of themselves.
Quote:
Icelander said: The term altruism may also refer to an ethical doctrine that claims that individuals are morally obliged to benefit others. Does this sound selfless?
Well, going by that definition alone it says nothing about requiring that there is no benefit to the individual while benefiting others. 
Any action taken morally has to satisfy the self. We create morals to satisfy our sensibilities.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Icelander]
#13992866 - 02/19/11 10:37 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: How is the Monk benefiting the species? In the same way the patriot who dies for his country? They both are self satisfied by their actions and therefore equally self serving first and foremost.
The Monk is lighting himself on fire and dying. That's not a benefit; that's a major decrease in fitness. Sure, it's possible he felt satisfaction in the few remaining minutes of his life but the overall goal of this actions were to promote survival of his species (more specifically, Buddhist monks) at the expense of his own survival and pleasure (the excruciating pain of the fire: also detrimental to the self). Altruism clear and simple.
Quote:
Icelander said: Outside of pure instinct which is out of our control there are no selfless actions. Satisfied?
For like the third time, I'm NOT talking about selfless actions!
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Cups
technically "here"


Registered: 12/24/09
Posts: 1,925
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13992909 - 02/19/11 10:43 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
But there IS no benefit to the spider who lets itself get eaten by its own young, or to the Buddhist monk who lights himself on fire.
Both these examples are bad. The spider's baby get to live and the monk becomes a legend. 
Although under Icelander's definition I suppose the only selfless act one could commit would be to exterminate all life (including yours) on the planet in one fell swoop.
BUT...If there is no self-less act then wouldn't that by extension mean there are no self-ish acts? There is simple action?
Because if there are no self-less acts, but there are still self-ish acts...then that must be because we are all part of the same great big Self. In this sense every act is Self-ish.
Has Icelander finally gotten down with the Brahman?
-------------------- What's up everybody?!
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: Cups]
#13992922 - 02/19/11 10:44 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cups said:
Quote:
But there IS no benefit to the spider who lets itself get eaten by its own young, or to the Buddhist monk who lights himself on fire.
Both these examples are bad. The spider's baby get to live and the monk becomes a legend. :shrug
Exactly; the spider's altruistic act has benefited its species and the monk's legendariness has benefited other Buddhist monks. Perfect examples of altruism.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13993049 - 02/19/11 11:07 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
The definition of Altruism is selfless. I'm talking about the primary definition which you choose to ignore for some strange reason. You also choose to ignore my example of the patriot soldier who "gives his life for his country". How is he any different than the buddhist. Fighting for his tribe. Could anything be more self serving?
I have no idea what you are talking about anymore. My original statement is there are no selfless actions. We act for our own interests first and foremost. I have no idea what you are talking about.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
teknix
𓂀⟁𓅢𓍝𓅃𓊰𓉡 𓁼𓆗⨻


Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: A problem with Compassion [Re: deCypher]
#13993058 - 02/19/11 11:10 PM (13 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Indifference =/= Compasionateless ?
I think that many people focus thier compassion for thier own purposes, and to strengthen its focus in time. Because you are indifferent to one cause, doesn't mean that you lack compassion in general?
Like say that I have 0 compassion for poor people. The reasoning for this is because thier choices and actions led to thier current predicament. I too have been poor, and know that it isn't that bad, with some ingenuity.
Does this make me without compassion?
It simply implies that I allocate my compassion to matters that I determine worthy of it or on matters where it would actually matter.
I mean what help is it to anyone for you to feel bad for someone?
I would personally be offended if someone felt bad for me. It is simply amplifying the negative vibe.
However, if you place your compassion on matters that you can help, it aids your passion, as they go hand in hand. I don't see the point in feeling bad about something that you cannot change, yet using it to your advantage to amplify your passion when applicable.
I don't think it's a mistake that compassion is comprised of passion.
By logically choosing where to place your compassion, does not lessen the selflessness of a given action.
You are simply choosing the course in which you would be most beneficial.
|
|