the problem with the question is one can subjectively ascribe selfish motives to other's actions without any knowledge of why they do what they do. It is actually a very powerful cognitive bias in human perception. We are more likely to explain our own actions by external factors, and other's by internal motivation.
Rand would describe something like a man going into medicine as a profession instead of music, which he wants to go into, because of family pressure. Sure, you can argue that he still gains something personally from being a doctor or following his family, but sort of intuitively, doing something against your will so that you fulfill someone else's wishes is not selfish. That there might be benefit does not mean that there must be volition.
If I gave a fluffy puppy to a unicorn, laced with cherry gumdrops that sparkled like stars when you smile at them, and then the unicorn smiled at me and we pranced in the field with the cheerful faeries in the land of all pleasant thoughts.
Mission. Fail.
...also cosign inamilist. I think. It sounds intellectual without actually answering the question. Therefore I approve.
That is not completely selfless. He became a doctor because he did not want his family to be unhappy with him. So in a way he still thought about his own feelings.
because we assume human volition, there is no situation where a person acts when you cannot ascribe some sense of self-motivation. Its close to being tautological.
In any realistic sense, the example Rand gave is sufficient, because you can't be said to know more about someone's motivations than they do themselves, especially in the given situation.
There is no such thing as selflessness, and there never will be. Every action can be led back to selfish motives through the mediums of God, Guilt and Greed.
Selflessness, in the context I think we mean to use, means acting outside of what is directly benefical to you.
However, you wouldn't do it if you didn't think it was for the best, so in a sense it is still not "selfless" because you do it because of something you hold in esteem.
You question is too broad is what I'm getting @.
__________________ "Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise." - Thomas Gray
Actually I find this general view that selfless actions don't exist because you are always in some way satisfying something you want to do as... a very shallow one. It confuses the motivation for an action with the reward, which is actually a false connection.
If I do something selfless, I do it because it is right. The fact that that makes me feel good is actually entirely irrelevant to that and in no way stops it being selfless.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
Last edited by Ushgarak on Nov 3rd, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Those behaviors which reap a primary benefit to yourself first and foremost, especially if there is detriment to others = selfish. Eg: I'm on a deserted island starving, another person with me is starving; I also have two coconuts and keep both for myself.
Those behaviors which reap a primary benefit to others first and foremost, especially if there is some detriment to yourself = selfless. Eg, I share one of my coconuts. Though I feel good about sharing (a secondary benefit), I will still be hungry. But at least the two of us won't be starving. This would be even more pronounced if I give both coconuts to the other person.
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
I also think it depends on the definition. I think it is evident that every conscious action a person does is inspired by a reason which in one way or another relates positively to their wishes, feelings and opinions. Contrary to what I argued not too long ago though, I wouldn't say that this means that all actions are equally "selfish", I believe a definition that comes close to what we commonly see as selfless acts is very useful and can be separated from other actions. So, though I think it is a fact that everyone does what they want most (for themselves), I don't think it's a revelation that one should lose sleep over.