Godot

I would posit that there is no such thing as a truly selfless, altruistic act. The simple fact that the person who perpetrates this act is enriched by some intrinsic mechanism through the perpetration of their act negates the ability to do something in a purely altruistic manner.
Any thoughts?

Warwick

I agree. I believe that people always act in their own self interest.

ReasonableDoubt

What about someone who would sacrifice himself to save his family? For example, in the Holocaust or some such tragedy when something like that could happen.

ARe you saying that giving your own life would be done out of selfishness? I'm interested...thanks.

John Page

Hi Godot!

By the same token I could argue there is no such thing as stupidity, since any act must be taken to cause enrichment etc.

Cheers, John

BTW, I do like the word "posit".

sugarcane

Well, such a sacrifice could well be in your own interest from a strictly biological point of view, i.e. securing the survival of your genes for the future. Albeit I doubt anyone sacrificing his/hers life for a family member have thoughts in that direction.

John Galt, Jr.

I assume each of you think all human actions are egoistic-- Warwick is explicit about this, but this is your view also, isn't it Godot? Now then, can either of you produce actual instances of egoistic actions and defend your claim that they are motivated by self-interest. I am curious as to why either of you think that other people ever act egoistically.

John Galt, Jr.

Tyler Durden

The word 'sacrifice' has been misused in about 99 percent of the time. If it is to mean a loss, and its antonym is gain, then one never truly sacrifices anything in acts of supposedly altruistic nature.

One does not sacrifice his life to save his family unless he values his life more than his family's.

If i thought my life is more important than my entire family's then killing myself to save theirs is accurately a "sacrifice."

As it stands, there are no such altruistic actions.

ReasonableDoubt

"One does not sacrifice his life to save his family unless he values his life more than his family's."

So if you value your family's life more than yours you should let them die instead of giving your own life? I don't follow.

Tyler Durden

No. I am not in the business of creating prescriptive norms, so kindly ditch the "ought" and stick to the "is."

If you value the lives of your family more than your own, then you can't call the act of saving your family by giving up your life sacrifice - but an act of gain.

An act of sacrifice is giving up a brand new volvo for a hand me down huffy.
An act of gain is giving up a huffy for a volvo.

A mother "sacrificing" her life for her child is technically not a sacrifice - unless she values her life more than her child's.

Tyler Durden

By the way, "sacrifice" in so-called altruistic actions is another unexamined concept that owes its origins to theistic reasoning.