In your opinion, are people basically

Are people basically

  • Good most of the time

    Votes: 10 29.4%
  • Morally Indifferent

    Votes: 11 32.4%
  • Bad when they feel they can get away with it

    Votes: 9 26.5%
  • Bad most of the time

    Votes: 4 11.8%

  • Total voters
    34

sleuth

Livin' Like Thanksgivin'
SamSpade said:
That's easy. Death. Dying for someone else's sake. It is impossible to reap the slightest benefit once you have given it up for someone else's sake. You might believe it is for the best, but once you're dead, you can't benefit from it any longer. And you haven't actually DONE it, until you are dead.

Even the act of dying for someone has instrinsic value to you. If I took a bullet for my kid, it isn't a sacrifice, because I value life and the hope of a new generation.

If I took a bullet for a stranger, my benefit is that somehow that stranger's life would be changed to where they would make the world... the same world that my family is living in... a better place.

You can still benefit even after dying if there is something you value more than your own life that is being satisfied. Maybe it's not a "tangible" benefit, but it is a perceived one.
 

sleuth

Livin' Like Thanksgivin'
2ndAmendment said:
having or showing the attitude or temper of a cynic : as a : contemptuously distrustful of human nature and motives b : based on or reflecting a belief that human conduct is motivated primarily by self-interest

You fit the deffinition.


That definition doesn't make any sense to me. :shrug: The second part applies, but the first part is wrong.

I'm not distrustful of human nature and motives, but rather I trust that human nature, i.e. that human conduct is motived by self-interest, always prevails. :yay: And... you're gonna love this.. that God designed us that way. He just challenged us to live up to His values.

So I guess I'm semi-cynical. :confused:
 
Last edited:

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
SamSpade said:
For example, I now posit that you personally never do a single act unless it is to further to purposes of evil on this planet. You got up early, you had your breakfast, you read the paper - all things done so you can prepare for the cruelty you plan to unleash on the world. You helped a little old lady across the street? Hah! You just did that to make her *trust* you, so you can hurt her later. No matter WHAT you do, I can turn it to the basic fact that you only commit the act to futher your own evil nature.
But don't I, at some point, have to actually unleash my evil in order to prove you right? :confused:

Example: why do people gamble, or do drugs? They want to do things AGAINST their benefit. Eventually, they succeed.
I disagree. Take my smoking, for example. Why do I smoke? Because I like to. Why don't I quit? Because I like to smoke. "But Dee Jay, you know how bad smoking is for you!" I don't care - the pleasure of smoking outweighs any harm I might be inflicting on myself.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
2ndAmendment said:
You fit the deffinition.
But why would you be glad that you're not like me, who thinks people act in their own benefit? Do you think people act to their own detriment? :confused:
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
sleuth said:
That definition doesn't make any sense to me. :shrug: The second part applies, but the first part is wrong.

I'm not distrustful of human nature and motives, but rather I trust that human nature, i.e. that human conduct is motived by self-interest, always prevails. :yay: And... you're gonna love this.. that God designed us that way. He just challenged us to live up to His values.

So I guess I'm semi-cynical. :confused:
You did notice that I bolded the '2:b' definition? That has been yours, vrai's, and BL's premise; all actions are primarily out of self-interest. If you don't like the definition, argue with Merriam-Webster.
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
vraiblonde said:
But why would you be glad that you're not like me, who thinks people act in their own benefit? Do you think people act to their own detriment? :confused:
Again, as SamSpade has said, we go around the circle. A soldier throws himself on a grenade to save your son from being killed. Did the soldier get anything out of it? It was a selfless act. If you cannot see that, then there is no hope of common ground.
 

sleuth

Livin' Like Thanksgivin'
2ndAmendment said:
You did notice that I bolded the '2:b' definition? That has been yours, vrai's, and BL's premise; all actions are primarily out of self-interest. If you don't like the definition, argue with Merriam-Webster.
Right... I saw that.

I was just saying that I'm only one and not the other. I believe humans are primarily motivated by self-interest (def. b) and I am trustful in their human nature that they do so (contradicts def. a)

So am I a cynic or not? Do I have to only fit 1 definition to be a cynic? Or do I only have to contradict 1 definition not to be? :wink:
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
sleuth said:
So am I a cynic or not? Do I have to only fit 1 definition to be a cynic? Or do I only have to contradict 1 definition not to be? :wink:
You are a cynic. You only have to fit one definition.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
sleuth said:
You can still benefit even after dying if there is something you value more than your own life that is being satisfied. Maybe it's not a "tangible" benefit, but it is a perceived one.
Well, it was only marginally relevant to what I discussed, but --- I can't see it. You cannot benefit from it, because until you have actually *died*, you have not actually 'done' it.

But, back to Occam - when you have to go around your azz to get to your elbow with this kind of reasoning, when the simplest explanation is, an act of selflessness, you're overanalyzing.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
vraiblonde said:
But don't I, at some point, have to actually unleash my evil in order to prove you right? :confused:
.
That's what makes it so eeeeeee-vil. No one knows!

Back to logic - of course not. Unless you think people must reveal THEIR motives to prove YOU right (hand on the stove thing, e.g.). This is the crux of my argument with respect to motives - only *you* can know your own motives (if you do at all). Back to the politics perspective - Bush goes to Iraq because he wants to protect Americans. No, Bush goes to Iraq to get oil for his cronies. Which motive was it?
I disagree. Take my smoking, for example. Why do I smoke? Because I like to. Why don't I quit? Because I like to smoke. "But Dee Jay, you know how bad smoking is for you!" I don't care - the pleasure of smoking outweighs any harm I might be inflicting on myself.
I wasn't making a statement about WHY people commit self-destructive behavior. I was only saying a case could just as easily be made that it is done *solely* for self-destruction, because the consequences can be examined.

You yourself know your own motives - but you don't know mine. If I still smoked, you could say I was doing it for my benefit - and I could counter that I am doing it against my benefit. You could then say I am only doing it to win this argument. I could counter that I, in fact, am trying to LOSE this argument (and failing, I might add ;) ). You are pre-judging motivations based on your own perspective, but you can't know another's motives. Because of that, you can't apply a motive to my behavior *before* I even do it.
 

sleuth

Livin' Like Thanksgivin'
SamSpade said:
That's what makes it so eeeeeee-vil. No one knows!

Back to logic - of course not. Unless you think people must reveal THEIR motives to prove YOU right (hand on the stove thing, e.g.). This is the crux of my argument with respect to motives - only *you* can know your own motives (if you do at all). Back to the politics perspective - Bush goes to Iraq because he wants to protect Americans. No, Bush goes to Iraq to get oil for his cronies. Which motive was it?

I wasn't making a statement about WHY people commit self-destructive behavior. I was only saying a case could just as easily be made that it is done *solely* for self-destruction, because the consequences can be examined.

You yourself know your own motives - but you don't know mine. If I still smoked, you could say I was doing it for my benefit - and I could counter that I am doing it against my benefit. You could then say I am only doing it to win this argument. I could counter that I, in fact, am trying to LOSE this argument (and failing, I might add ;) ). You are pre-judging motivations based on your own perspective, but you can't know another's motives. Because of that, you can't apply a motive to my behavior *before* I even do it.
Sam... who knows. :shrug:
You could be right. It doesn't make any sense to me that someone would act toward their detriment, but obviously we can't change your mind.

Myself... I consider myself reasonable. I value sound reasoning. :wink: And to me, you haven't yet made an argument here that sounds more reasonable than mine. I did read every one of your posts with interest though, and tried to keep an open mind, but your arguments didn't float my boat.

God Bless America! :cheers:
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
SamSpade said:
You yourself know your own motives - but you don't know mine.
I aways assume people's motives are "because they like it".

Why does our neighbor stay with her abusive husband? She must like it.

Why do I agree to do gratis work for people who drive me crazy? I must like it. (Actually, the pain of turning someone away is worse for me than the work itself. So I do like the work better than I like the turning away.)

Because of that, you can't apply a motive to my behavior *before* I even do it.
Obviously not, because I don't know you did it until you actually do it. But once you do it, I can reasonably think to myself, "There must be some benefit to himself when he does that." What exactly that benefit is, I have no idea unless you tell me. But there must be a benefit to you or you wouldn't do it.
 
K

Kain99

Guest
People act to their detriment everyday.... Why? because they put others before themselves. Simple to the good, very complicated to the bad.
 

sleuth

Livin' Like Thanksgivin'
Kain99 said:
People act to their detriment everyday.... Why? because they put others before themselves. Simple to the good, very complicated to the bad.
Have you been reading any of this conversation? :confused:
 
Top