|
The daily flamebait | by Arachnid | 2004-10-21 02:00:38 |
|
Depends | by Spisefisken | 2004-10-21 02:09:19 |
|
Wasn't it Freud that held the view... | by Arachnid | 2004-10-21 02:11:22 |
|
I agree with you there | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 03:45:29 |
|
Huh? | by Spisefisken | 2004-10-21 04:08:23 |
|
I think you're missing my point somewhat | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 04:44:51 |
|
You might not expect it consciously | by Spisefisken | 2004-10-21 04:53:48 |
|
The *real* point I am trying to make | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 07:15:43 |
|
But are acting selfish | by Spisefisken | 2004-10-21 07:28:56 |
|
And it makes you feel good to know | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 07:41:03 |
|
You just assume it will devalue the action. | by Naruki | 2004-10-21 07:51:28 |
| I'll try to explain |
by Yaeger |
2004-10-21 08:06:48 |
First of all, I think that this does not cause a problem for everybody. Just for some people, but I wouldn't call them shallow. I feel it's a psychological trap, which *can* be very dangerous.
Suppose you seek a selfish reason behind every altruistic act. The person performing that act couldn't possibly be doing it for you then, otherwise it would not be selfish. Thinking this way, how could any altruistic act towards you make you feel good if there is only a selfish reason behind it ? |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Suppose you seek an altruistic reason | by Naruki | 2004-10-21 08:23:33 |
|
Well put, on paranoia and zealotry, . . . | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 08:28:19 |
|
This is by far a mental exercise | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 08:32:25 |
|
That does not necessarily follow | by HadEnuf | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Which is *exactly* the trap I am thinking of. | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 08:54:41 |
|
Then we are approaching the same point, . . . | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 09:04:04 |
|
I'm approaching it from the point | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 09:15:13 |
|
And I am approaching it from *my* experience, | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 09:24:12 |
|
Great, an argument over something we agree on :) (n/t) | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 09:34:57 |
|
No, everyone *is* capable of the sane "attitude" | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 10:05:27 |
|
Sorry, but I don't think everyone | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 10:20:31 |
|
I might buy "unwilling", but not "incapable" | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 11:09:08 |
|
Mmm, difficult one. | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 12:23:35 |
|
The obverse is equally "true". | by Naruki | 2004-10-21 08:49:33 |
|
Which in my mind means that | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 08:52:15 |
|
I don't know whether Naruki agrees, but . . . | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 08:54:55 |
|
Which means we don't agree with Yaeger. | by Naruki | 2004-10-21 08:58:18 |
|
Not entirely certain of that | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 09:16:42 |
|
Regardless of my benefactor's motives, | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 08:27:05 |
|
I think you're spot on with the evaluation bit. | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 08:41:43 |
|
Not true | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 09:02:44 |
|
The thing I am arguing for | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 09:13:21 |
|
That seems to be the first time you've made that | by Naruki | 2004-10-21 09:24:14 |
|
Hey, grant *some* points for *trying* | by HadEnuf | 2004-10-21 09:26:26 |
|
In future, it would help | by Yaeger | 2004-10-21 09:39:07 |
|
I didn't burn you at all. That's in your mind. | by Naruki | 2004-10-21 15:19:40 |
