Is self interest the best or only basis for morality?

[say what]

I'm not saying self-interest is selfishness...I'm saying that it seems to me is one of those new terms I find which tries to replace the moral concept of selfishness with something more free from morality, make it sound more 'freshy', and not filled with 'guilty moral' connotations.
I'm ok with it . I just need to be in touch with the changes in the dictionary. After all, its good to respect a language and its words, and you can understand it much better.

Very true! A lot of time self-interest is through selfish actions! But they're not always the same thing

 

[muir]

If we think of the growth of civilization as tiny individual and self-contained units, we can begin to see that centralizing groups geographically was a function of humans realizing that they needed others for support.

I don't think it happened consciously like that

I think communities settled in fertile areas and then propsered and expanded and then merged with other communities when they came into contact with them

As for 'civilisation' that is really where things took a bad turn. People began agriculture and they developed surpluses which lead to barter and then trade which in turn was driven forward by the development of writing as a way of recording things


This then created castes as some became more wealthy than others and some could read and write whilst others couldn't and so on. This process has only really occured in the last 10,000 years and with it the developement of hierarchies. Its when people started to set themselves apart as different social groups that you can see people consciously acting in their self interest

Before that people were hunting and gathering and living as one being in a sense. They weren't making conscious decisions to live within a certain postcode and to do a certain career because they thought that would boost their status...that simply was not a factor

So humans did not 'realise' that they needed others for support THEY HAD ALWAYS SUPPORTED EACH OTHER

On an individual level, sure we were always together...but if we think of it in units - a group of 3-4 families as a sustainable unit - they came together to form tribes because it was easier for them to survived within a larger group.

People have always been living in tribes. They did not think consciously 'this will be good for us' it was just the natural thing to live in groups. As groups grew and their territories exapanded they would inevitably have started breeding with their neighbouring groups and merged

Scientists have found that male whales that travel into new areas of the ocean prove popular with the females there because their whale song sounds exotic to the females

The choice to come together is predominately one of self-interest, as their change of survival significantly increased when they grouped up. This idea of smaller groups coming together to survive has expanded over the centuries to form cities. So while we might not see it now, the essence and purpose of cities was to increase our ability to survive- a function of self-interest!

There was no 'grouping up'! Humans were ALWAYS grouped up

Cities were the product of agricultural surpluses leading to grain stores which allowed some people to NOT work but form exploitative groups that lived off the labours of the farmers for example trade exchanges, priests, royal families, warriors

These classes then tried to expand their power by attacking other groups leading to people putting walls around their settlements

You could argue that the caste system is what created the conscious idea of self interest. You could also say that the caste system is what really fired competition and conflict

But before that people were not thinking in terms of their self interest, they just were following their purpose just like any other animal

Going into cities is perhaps the moment of leaving the garden of eden in a sense....that was our fall.....it was when self interest became a conscious issue for the leisured classes; the majority of people would still have been living a very community based life; its really the upper castes: the kings and queens, the warriors and the priests who didn't have to toil in the fields who had the free time and lack of purpose to scheme and focus on status

Even in norman times however, which could perhaps be seen as a boom time for the warrior caste, the competing warrior caste still developed a code between themselves called 'chivalry' and 'courtesy' whereby they maintained a certain mindset which softened their behaviour towards each other as they felt a kinship towards each other (and that was amongst the most ruthless of humans!)

 

[say what]

Thought this article might add to the discussion!

http://aeon.co/magazine/living-together/morality-may-have-evolved-but-it-isnt-fixed/

 

[say what]

But before that people were not thinking in terms of their self interest, they just were following their purpose just like any other animal

What was their purpose?

I agree with this, but I would say survival was their purpose. Thus, any action they did to survive was in self-interest....part of that was collecting into groups to meet the demands of the environment together.

 

[muir]

What was their purpose?

I agree with this, but I would say survival was their purpose. Thus, any action they did to survive was in self-interest....part of that was collecting into groups to meet the demands of the environment together.

if you think of a tree...it is not thinking about its self interest it just is. If you think of a bird...it is surviving but it is not thinking in terms of its self interest...it is just being a bird

That is the way of the tao

Humans have strayed off the path and that is why they are now endlessly questioning

Its not that complicated. We're social animals that evolved overa long period of time to be mutually benificial to each other...to support each other in every sense

Very recently something has happened to change all that and we are seeing a dip in peoples mental health which will dip the further and further we move from the tao

 

[say what]

if you think of a tree...it is not thinking about its self interest it just is. If you think of a bird...it is surviving but it is not thinking in terms of its self interest...it is just being a bird

That is the way of the tao

Humans have strayed off the path and that is why they are now endlessly questioning

Its not that complicated. We're social animals that evolved overa long period of time to be mutually benificial to each other...to support each other in every sense

Very recently something has happened to change all that and we are seeing a dip in peoples mental health which will dip the further and further we move from the tao

Self-interest can be a non-conscious action. Like the bird, everything that it does is to further itself and it's survival- the essence of self-interest. Thus, self-interest is the key to survival, and always will be.

Humans are unique, in that their conscious and sub-conscious has developed beyond basic instinct- and has created morality and has expanded the idea of what survival is - is it social, physical, psychological? Survival isn't just maintaining our physical being in order to pass on our genes, it now means much more. But at the heart of it all, is our instinctual desire to protect ourselves and our self-interest.

 

[muir]

Self-interest can be a non-conscious action. Like the bird, everything that it does is to further itself and it's survival- the essence of self-interest. Thus, self-interest is the key to survival, and always will be.

Humans are unique, in that their conscious and sub-conscious has developed beyond basic instinct- and has created morality and has expanded the idea of what survival is - is it social, physical, psychological? Survival isn't just maintaining our physical being in order to pass on our genes, it now means much more. But at the heart of it all, is our instinctual desire to protect ourselves and our self-interest.

There is also enlightened self interest...the understanding that by helping others we help ourselves

When a bird sees a shadow overhead and gives a warning call to the other birds it is not acting purely in its own self interest but rather as part of an entity...part of a community

[video=youtube;-xINoemDoU0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xINoemDoU0[/video]

 

[say what]

There is also enlightened self interest...the understanding that by helping others we help ourselves

When a bird sees a shadow overhead and gives a warning call to the other birds it is not acting purely in its own self interest but rather as part of an entity...part of a community

[video=youtube;-xINoemDoU0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xINoemDoU0[/video]

Yes, I agree that there's different levels of self-interest...but it's still self-interest! Self-interest doesn't have to be a bad thing, or be done through negative or selfish actions. Altruistic actions can done with self-interest in mind.

 

[muir]

Yes, I agree that there's different levels of self-interest...but it's still self-interest! Self-interest doesn't have to be a bad thing, or be done through negative or selfish actions. Altruistic actions can done with self-interest in mind.

But you are still talking about having it ''in mind''; what i'm saying is sometimes it just is

The bird doesn't have it in mind it is just in its nature

 

[say what]

But you are still talking about having it ''in mind''; what i'm saying is sometimes it just is

The bird doesn't have it in mind it is just in its nature

Oh no- I'm not saying that it's always conscious, I think it's innate and often times unnoticed. It's when we actively 'think' about it, that often times morality goes against it.

 

[LucyJr]

Self-interest is self-awarness. You can't escape morality by introducing the "new" concept of 'self-interest'. Its just a red hair.

 

[say what]

Self-interest is self-awarness. You can't escape morality by introducing the "new" concept of 'self-interest'. Its just a red hair.

Self-interest can be done with awareness....but, because self-interest is fundamental to our survival and evolution, it's not always a conscious cause of our actions.

I'm interested though in what you mean that self-interest is self-awareness - it sounds like you're suggesting their one in the same.

 

[the]

Did we move to group living to help others? Or move to group living because it helped us?

doesn't self-interest contradict morality?

Did we move to group living or did it start out that way? When and where were humans living and thriving as individuals? You need at least two to keep the tribe moving through the ages.

 

[muir]

Oh no- I'm not saying that it's always conscious, I think it's innate and often times unnoticed. It's when we actively 'think' about it, that often times morality goes against it.

I think contentment can be found in living most in alignment with what is natural

I think that we have been told to live in unnatural ways by some people who deliberately misslead us because they are consciously acting in their self interest to the detriment of everyone else

I believe life is about establishing what is natural for us and then living in accordance with that

What i have found is that various barriers both corporeal and incorporeal have been created to block me in that process; also new barriers are being formed all the time

For example in the US people are now being penalised by the authorities for collecting their own rain water. The authorities are obviously acting on behalf of the corporations who privately own the water grid and want to keep people plugged into their grid

That is unnatural and will make people unhappy

 

[LucyJr]

Self-interest can be done with awareness....but, because self-interest is fundamental to our survival and evolution, it's not always a conscious cause of our actions.

I'm interested though in what you mean that self-interest is self-awareness - it sounds like you're suggesting their one in the same.

There are only two options:
1. Self-interest is awarness of self, just basic things, like I exist, I need food, I need protection, I can think, I this and that and so on.
2. Self-interest is just interest in self, which in classic moral language it means selfishness, not self-interest. In this option, everything what I do, I do because of my own interest. I don't have any other interest in any other person. If I do have, I have it only as mean to a higher interest, my own interests. Every other people I met and I interact with, even if I help them, they do not exist for me, in any more significant sense. They exist to serve me, and my own interest. In this option, love is a illusion. Everything is for me. Me, me, me, me, me, me, me and so on...There is no such thing as 'the good of the community'. It is a good because it is good for me, not because it is really good for the community. Its the same circle, where everything is for me, it starts from me, and it ends for me.

Edit:
Also in the second option, in my opinion the good of the group or community can not even be formed or thinked in the mid of every individual. The moment you said 'the good of the community', you are capable at thinking over yourself. But this contradicts the very philosophy of the second option.

 

[say what]

Did we move to group living or did it start out that way? When and where were humans living and thriving as individuals? You need at least two to keep the tribe moving through the ages.

As I said to [MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION] earlier:

If we think of the growth of civilization as tiny individual and self-contained units, we can begin to see that centralizing groups geographically was a function of humans realizing that they needed others for support. On an individual level, sure we were always together...but if we think of it in units - a group of 3-4 families as a sustainable unit - they came together to form tribes because it was easier for them to survived within a larger group. The choice to come together is predominately one of self-interest, as their change of survival significantly increased when they grouped up. This idea of smaller groups coming together to survive has expanded over the centuries to form cities. So while we might not see it now, the essence and purpose of cities was to increase our ability to survive- a function of self-interest!

Individual in the sense that they are individual unique units- we are never "alone", we're born into a unit. But that unit has it's own self-interest (and we also have our own individual self-interest). My comment is that for the survival of the individual (or individual unit of family), we had to seek out more individuals to survive. Living together, was beneficial for us. Thus, the earliest beginnings of tribes, towns, cities, etc. was from the idea that grouping together benefited our survival.

Within society there is a battle between cooperation and competition- morality vs. self-interest can be considered to often be in this conflict.

 

[say what]

I think contentment can be found in living most in alignment with what is natural

I think that we have been told to live in unnatural ways by some people who deliberately misslead us because they are consciously acting in their self interest to the detriment of everyone else

I believe life is about establishing what is natural for us and then living in accordance with that

What i have found is that various barriers both corporeal and incorporeal have been created to block me in that process; also new barriers are being formed all the time

For example in the US people are now being penalised by the authorities for collecting their own rain water. The authorities are obviously acting on behalf of the corporations who privately own the water grid and want to keep people plugged into their grid

That is unnatural and will make people unhappy

With the development of the conscious and subconscious, we are not able to reach altruistic and high understandings of self-actualization. But what I'm saying, is from a purely biological and evolutionary standpoint, self-interest is an intrinsic property of human nature, as it ensured our survival.

By today's standards and the growth of our intelligence - intellectually, spiritually, emotionally, etc. - we can step back from primal innate behaviours like this, and consider their broader impact on others. However, when you discuss self-interest and morality, I think it's important to understand where self-interest comes from (imo), and how it's shaped the development of humans and our social history.

 

[say what]

There are only two options:
1. Self-interest is awarness of self, just basic things, like I exist, I need food, I need protection, I can think, I this and that and so on.
2. Self-interest is just interest in self, which in classic moral language it means selfishness, not self-interest. In this option, everything what I do, I do because of my own interest. I don't have any other interest in any other person. If I do have, I have it only as mean to a higher interest, my own interests. Every other people I met and I interact with, even if I help them, they do not exist for me, in any more significant sense. They exist to serve me, and my own interest. In this option, love is a illusion. Everything is for me. Me, me, me, me, me, me, me and so on...There is no such thing as 'the good of the community'. It is a good because it is good for me, not because it is really good for the community. Its the same circle, where everything is for me, it starts from me, and it ends for me.

Edit:
Also in the second option, in my opinion the good of the group or community can not even be formed or thinked in the mid of every individual. The moment you said 'the good of the community', you are capable at thinking over yourself. But this contradicts the very philosophy of the second option.

How can they be distinctly different?

We all need food. Is me eating my food, and not giving it to others who need food selfish?

You can have interest in yourself, and in others. Self-interest is hugely different than being selfish.

 

[muir]

As I said to @muir earlier:



Individual in the sense that they are individual unique units- we are never "alone", we're born into a unit. But that unit has it's own self-interest (and we also have our own individual self-interest). My comment is that for the survival of the individual (or individual unit of family), we had to seek out more individuals to survive. Living together, was beneficial for us. Thus, the earliest beginnings of tribes, towns, cities, etc. was from the idea that grouping together benefited our survival.

Within society there is a battle between cooperation and competition- morality vs. self-interest can be considered to often be in this conflict.

I don't think it was an 'idea' i think it was just our nature...that's what i've been getting at, and possibly what the is getting at

 

[muir]

With the development of the conscious and subconscious, we are not able to reach altruistic and high understandings of self-actualization. But what I'm saying, is from a purely biological and evolutionary standpoint, self-interest is an intrinsic property of human nature, as it ensured our survival.

By today's standards and the growth of our intelligence - intellectually, spiritually, emotionally, etc. - we can step back from primal innate behaviours like this, and consider their broader impact on others. However, when you discuss self-interest and morality, I think it's important to understand where self-interest comes from (imo), and how it's shaped the development of humans and our social history.

lol i think our 'primal, innate behaviours' were working together as a community

This wasn't an idea we had...it wasn't a conscious act or decision...it just was our nature to be like that and it is still our nature to be like that

The idea of thinking ''hmm whats in my best interest here'' is a recent phenomenon which has been implanted by the psychopaths who formed extra social stratas that preyed on the rest of the humanity

Their politcial mouthpieces can still be heard today saying things like: ''you must operate only in your own interests, there is no such thing as society, its a dog eat dog world, people are innately sefish and greedy'' and so on because they want to destroy the community that is our strength and they want to justify their own abherent behaviours

They want to say: 'i'm going to take everything you have here and that is ok because it is just 'business''

It's not ok and i don't give a damn about their poxy business