" . You stated that the basic human drives are inherently selfish"
Yes, people say basic human drive is to procreate, and people do not procreate 24/7, but do it hell of alot. "when people eat they are not selfish" how is someone going to be selfish alone?? "i was trying to say that you are making a moral judgement about basic human drives...which are by nature amoral" I base it on observation. I know people do not like to say humans are bad. " Read my fund manager analogy to find out why this is a problematic > definition ." I took that from the oxford dictionary. " > response to you taking a very "black or white" stance on whether or not > something could be considered selfish," How can it be grey? when people argue in a court of law then it can seem grey. " You're right...the idea that a person is either one thing or another > 100% of the time is silly" So when we say someone is a happy person, we are wrong, because they can become sad? On Oct 6, 2011 8:32 AM, "Nat Russo" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Patience <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I never said everything we do can be called selfish, (read my past emails) >> your taking what i said and going to the silly extreme. everything i >> mentioned with involving being selfish involved interaction with others. >> > I've been reading all of your emails. Allow me to quote what you said: > > " Humans are biological entities, therefore at the core of their need >> structure is three very strong drives: eat, have sex, and don't die." >> And they have one thing in common, looking out for ones self. Drives font >> include looking out for others >> " because of our deficiency in physical strength learned to band together >> to provide safety in numbers." >> " But we also are competitive, which is why we are seriously still into "my >> tribe v. your tribe" mindsets. At best" >> " realize that food, sex, and survival are at the foundation" >> At the core of all of that is that they are looking out for themselves and >> their happiness ergo selfishness. >> Look at why humans in general do what they do: breed, survive, succeed, >> find happiness = looking out for ones self. > > > The words in quotes are Ray's, I believe. Now, read what you said. > Particularly the line that ends "ergo selfishness". You stated that the > basic human drives are inherently selfish. That is why I responded with the > following: > >> " "Selfish" is a word that is filled with moral connotations." >> " In fact, the word in and of itself tends to be used as a moral judgement >> more often than not." >> > > I was trying to say that you are making a moral judgement about basic human > drives...which are by nature amoral. > > >> >> Well selfishness is not a good thing. > > > A point I never argued. > >> Selfish: lacking consideration for others when concerned with one’s own >> personal profit or pleasure: >> > Read my fund manager analogy to find out why this is a problematic > definition. > >> In general people are so engrosed with their own life they will more often >> than not "lack consideration" of others. >> >> " a parent who places the mask on themselves first is NOT selfish." >> >> When you call someone happy that does not mean they are happy 100% of the >> time, it just means that, that emotion is shown majority of the time >> compared to other emitions. >> >> > You're restating my argument, not presenting a new one. > > The fact that a person is not one thing or another 100% of the time was my > response to you taking a very "black or white" stance on whether or not > something could be considered selfish (or, specifically to the point, > whether or not a person could be considered "selfless" based on one selfless > act). You're right...the idea that a person is either one thing or another > 100% of the time is silly. That's why I pointed it out. > > The bottom line is we disagree on what should be considered selfish. To > each his own.
