Maddox on Sony

[Needles Kane]

Everything a person does is motivated by some self interest. It's what makes the world go 'round.

[Atarifever]

Everything a person does is motivated by some self interest. It's what makes the world go 'round.

 

 

I really think trying to explain every behaviour through rewards, which is an outdated behaviourist viewpoint, is not just stupid, but damaging. If you take away the ability to see people as good beyond self interst, then every good thing anyone ever did loses all meaning. This, based on some really, really, unproven ideas from a school of thought that fell out of academic favour years ago. It seems stupid.

[madhatter667]

Self satisfaction from donating? Sure, most people would feel that.

What was childish about saying that someone has donated to charities without any real personal connections to?

[misspent_youth]

The point of me bringing up an apparently outdated idea was that people were saying that charitable works done out of some self-interest, whatever it may be, are somehow less morally worthy than those that are done where an immediate and direct self-interest is not readily apparent. I completely disagree with that opinion. I don't see the distinction as valid. It's like saying quitting smoking after someone you know dies of lung cancer is less of an achievement than quitting because you know smoking causes lung cancer generally. Both are just as difficult and just as praiseworthy.

 

The childish part of Atarifever's reply madhatter was calling an idea bullshit and retarded. It lessens the impact of any subsequent point, valid or not. The same goes for calling an idea stupid. It's just showmanship.

 

I think I may have had the argument attributed to me that acting in one's own self interest somehow removes the moral component of any act. I don't agree with that statement. The morality lies in what one derives self satisfaction out of, not the reason why it satisfies. Granted, it may lead to extreme examples, but I can live with them.