I don't believe that ANYONE does anything selflessly. Even Mother Teresa, I'm sure, got joy from doing what she did. I believe that without some form of compensation, we won't act. I believe this is called egoism. What do you think?
2007-05-09
16:11:59
·
20 answers
·
asked by
ComicWriter
2
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Just to clarify my thinking here: I believe that those who give their lives for others, I believe they do it for "selfish" (not the best word, but it'll have to do) reasons. As in, they know they will be well thought of, or they love the person, etc. Even if they don't realize it, it is still not selfless.
2007-05-09
16:25:34 ·
update #1
I'm also not saying that it is wrong to feel good or get something out of doing good. I'm just saying that I don't believe that humans are capable of acting selflessly. It's not in our wiring so to speak.
2007-05-09
16:28:24 ·
update #2
Pablo, why are you trying to doit? Aren't you doing it for the reward from God? That is not acting selflessly is it?
2007-05-09
16:30:12 ·
update #3
Evil Meyagi - Why did you try to develop those qualities? Were you not doing it to satisfy a desire to be a better person, or for the joy of helping others? This is what I'm saying, that we act for our own selfish reasons. Even though they may not be bad reasons and the results can be good.
2007-05-09
16:33:13 ·
update #4
It's true, we don't & can't act selflessly.
People always have ulterior motives.
Even if they don't realise it.
It's just who we are and what the Human Mind is capable of.
2007-05-09 16:16:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
With that philosophy of life, nothing has any meaning and getting joy from murder and rape is no different form being joyful that you helped someone.
Such an argument cannot stand; it just rolls away, because it is circular.
Yes it is possible for a human to act selflessly. Redefining terms to make them irrelevant is not a productive way to achieve anything meaningful in life.
Restraint and self-control are things to strive for in this world. Whether or not you receive joy does not define selfless behavior. What you do to receive joy defines it much better.
Mother Theresa suffered a lot in her life, serving mankind. I am sure that she felt joy, despite her suffering . . . not because of what she did, but because pain and suffering had been relieved for someone else.
Mother Theresa would have felt joy observing the results, whether or not she did anything to cause it. She would have performed the selfless acts whether or not she believed that there would be a reward.
Many people believe that Christians seek the reward or heaven. Actually, Christians rarely conciser heaven. They are content having a relationship with God. That relationship fosters an assurance that the relationship will continue . . . a peace that surpasses understanding.
Even if the people receiving the help she gave were unappreciative, she would have had joy because of her relationship with God. If fact, she would have experienced joy no matter what happened in her life. Joy was a part of her life, regardless of what befell her or those around her.
Joy was not her goal, it was her state of being, so your theory does not apply. That is the difference between a Christian and all others. We experience joy independently of our actions or the promise of any "rewards."
That's what selfless is, acting independently of the promise of a reward. It takes work and practice, but can definitely be done.
God bless you for inquiring.
2007-05-09 17:08:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by danny_boy_jones 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Who said that acting selflessly means that you get no joy out of it? The feeling you get when you act selflessly can't be compared to the feeling you get when you get a really cool birthday present, or when someone says yes when you ask them out on a date. It's a...I don't know how to put it, maybe I'll just call it selfless joy. Pure joy for someone else other than yourself.
2007-05-09 16:20:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by AlliwantISAfrica 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Altruism-- unselfish concern for the welfare of others. The reward is in the capacity to give, not in the return. Anything done for others to recieve something in return is self-seeking manipulation. For the last 13+ yrs i have dedicated my life to developing those qualities that enable me to give without reservation or thought of reward and i am now a very very vey rich ( spiritually, not financially ) man and experience joy on a daily basis; ocasionally i also feel something metahuman in nature which actually lifts my soul more than any other sense or substance was ever able to provide me with.
2007-05-09 16:29:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Master Ang Gi Guong 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes it feels good to act philanthropically. But is feeling good a bad thing? Is feeling good about doing good for others a bad thing? Sounds a little Puritanical to me.
The primary motivation may be a selfless act of kindness. If one happens to feel good afterward, I think that's fine. But there are times when I have done a selfless act and still been devastated afterwards. I continue to do good.
2007-05-09 16:22:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Linda R 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. Look at Christ or The Buddha. Look at the countless sages the world has seen. What is the meaning of the word "selfless" anyway. Only through compassion can one be selfless. Otherwise do you mean "selfless" to be indifferently acting? If you love someone and do a good deed, is it selfish because you love them? People on a spiritual path can truly be selfless.
2007-05-09 17:42:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by Empire 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not really. Certainly not in a total fashion.
I do however have problems with the ideas expressed by Ayn Rand and Satanism that suppose we only act in out own self interest. I think we function as a blend of the two.
A bit altruistic, a bit objectivist. Neither extreme survives long.
2007-05-09 16:19:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by U-98 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
we are to concern God in that we are to comprehend that he's the main severe over each and every of the earth and he has the flexibility and actually the precise to do something he needs with all his introduction (which includes us). it is a healthful concern in line with understanding our very own obstacles and the certainty that he has just about none. We additionally love him because of the fact as all of us comprehend him we come to comprehend that he has enjoyed us and that each and every little thing he has ever executed has been for our earnings. Even the certainty that he's allowing devil to rule the earth right now is a gadget to prepare us that we won't be able to rule ourselves or have happiness without God.
2016-11-26 23:17:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is possible, though it can be difficult at first. I am learning how and will go on trying. What I have observed is that when I give priority to others, God remembers me. I always get repaid many times over, if not now later but surely.
2007-05-09 16:28:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by PabloSolutin 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If they chose too.
Okay, upon what you are describing as selfless, it could also be termed "an expression of self".
Slavery is selfless. When you are used for the purpose of anothers goals.
And that is alien to our nature. So, I agree with you. What does it say to you about self-filled acts?
2007-05-09 16:22:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by shakalahar 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ever been in labor? ;)
Yes I think people do things selflessly. The Nazi war camp survior who held the door while his student escaped the mad man at VTech? I don't think he got anything out of that. I think he just did something truely selfless.
2007-05-09 16:16:49
·
answer #11
·
answered by ~Heathen Princess~ 7
·
2⤊
0⤋