Can people truly be selfless?

[Aphex_Twin]

Can an action that is decidedly selfless really be undertaken by a conscious individual?

Because it doesn't make sense.

Why do people act in the first place?

 

[El_Machinae]

Not truely selfless, each person has a motivation that (at some point) can been seen as selfish. The desire to be seen as honorable, or to not be seen as a coward, etc.

But there are certainly examples that come damned close to selflessness. Jumping on a grenade, for example.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

No. There is always some kind of result from a person's action, so in that way, the person is expecting something. You can get close (like El Machinae's example), or if you were completely ignorant as to the results of your action.

 

[Mulholland]

I tried to convince myself that my actions were truly selfless for an entire year. I was honestly constantly nauseous.

 

[Azash]

Like El_M said. No matter what you do, you do it for yourself, since to commit a selfless act, you must find it good or pleasant to do so. And since you find it good or pleasant, you do it to experience that feeling.

 

[Gilder]

The only selfless people on the planet are dead.

 

[Civrules]

Pretty much like El said, every action can be seen as selfish. Of course, our true definition of selfishness is when we seek something for our advantage but to another person's disadvantage.

However when you think about it, even when we do something that helps other people, that in a way is yet again selfish, the only reason why no one calls it out is because we aren't hurting anyone.
It's an interesting subject.

 

[punkbass2000]

True virtue has no virtue.

 

[El_Machinae]

Of course, our true definition of selfishness is when we seek something for our advantage but to another person's disadvantage.

I agree with this definition; and if we use it, then I agree that someone can be non-selfish (hurting themselves to benefit another - without intentionally hurting someone else in the process)

 

[Mise]

I can certainly do something purely for someone else. Whether or not I then feel good about it is inconsequential; I did it for someone else, and only for that reason.

 

[Azash]

Then it is not a selfless action, because you want to follow your moral/ethical upbringing by benefitting someone else, even if it would not directly do you good.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Like El_M said. No matter what you do, you do it for yourself, since to commit a selfless act, you must find it good or pleasant to do so. And since you find it good or pleasant, you do it to experience that feeling.

Where in the Fraction of a second it takes to jump on the Grenade are you supposed to feel good about it?

 

[aneeshm]

Truly selfless action is impossible, and if it were possible, it would be the end of the human race as we knew it.

 

[Azash]

Where in the Fraction of a second it takes to jump on the Grenade are you supposed to feel good about it?

If you would not jump on the grenade, and it would be in accordance with your behaviour to jump on the grenade, you would feel excess amounts of guilt and shame. It is not selfless, since you are still following your own idea of ideal behaviour by "sacrificing" yourself. In my opinion, true selflessness requires you to bypass all morality and ethics and all feelings of shame, pride, and so forth when doing something. This would, in essence, render you catatonic, and thus I find selflessness a paradox.

 

[Mise]

Then it is not a selfless action, because you want to follow your moral/ethical upbringing by benefitting someone else, even if it would not directly do you good.

No, if the only reason that I am doing something is for someone else, then it is purely selfless. If I just so happen to also follow my moral/ethical standards by doing so then that's just a by-product. The REASON is purely selfless, regardless of however else I may be benefited.

 

[punkbass2000]

If you would not jump on the grenade, and it would be in accordance with your behaviour to jump on the grenade, you would feel excess amounts of guilt and shame. It is not selfless, since you are still following your own idea of ideal behaviour by "sacrificing" yourself. In my opinion, true selflessness requires you to bypass all morality and ethics and all feelings of shame, pride, and so forth when doing something. This would, in essence, render you catatonic, and thus I find selflessness a paradox.

What if you act without thought?

 

[Azash]

What you just said is not making sense. If it wasn't a part of your moral/ethics to perform "a selfless act", why on earth would you perform it? I guess it could be accidental, but then it is not selfless either.

 

[Azash]

What if you act without thought?

A person who truly finds it a part of ethics/moral NOT to jump on grenades wouldn't do it.

 

[Mise]

What you just said is not making sense. If it wasn't a part of your moral/ethics to perform "a selfless act", why on earth would you perform it? I guess it could be accidental, but then it is not selfless either.

Look, it's quite simple. I'll number them so you can tell me where the problem is.

1. I chose to do something.
2. The ONLY reason why I chose to do it is because it would benefit someone else.
3. Therefore, I am doing something PURELY for someone else.

 

[Azash]

Point 2. It requires selflessness to be an ideal of your ethics/moral! Are you even reading my posts? If a person does not consider "selflessness" ethically/morally ideal, he will not randomly jump on grenades.