There are no selfless acts among men

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximus_Power
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Maximus_Power

Guest
There are no true selfless acts among men. Even people who perform altruistic acts for complete strangers are doing, so because it gives them a c sense of joy knowing that they are doing a good deed. Aka a life in exchange for joy.

The only exception to this rule would be Jesus and Mary due to the fact that they were born with without original sin and truely innocent victims.

Does this sound right to you?

It sounds logical, but it makes me feel uneasy
 
Maximus_Power said:
There are no true selfless acts among men. Even people who perform altruistic acts for complete strangers are doing, so because it gives them a c sense of joy knowing that they are doing a good deed. Aka a life in exchange for joy.

The only exception to this rule would be Jesus and Mary due to the fact that they were born with without original sin and truely innocent victims.

Does this sound right to you?

It sounds logical, but it makes me feel uneasy
Click to expand...
I would disagree and say that acts with some degree of selflessness is usually practiced at some point. It is quite possible to do a good act without an emotional reward. Acting for totally altruistic reasons is rare, but it is possible.
 
It doesn’t sound right to me. It would lead to a conclusion like this:

A sees a swimmer in trouble and dives in to save him. His motivation: it gives him joy to save a life.
B sees a swimmer in trouble and watches him drown. His motivation: it gives him joy to gloat over somebody else’s painful death.
Therefore A and B both acted out of the same motivation, the wish to feel joy.
Therefore A and B are morally equal.

Something not quite right there, I think
 
Last edited:
Of course it is correct. But my question is, what difference does it make?

You can either make the world a better place, and help improve the lives of others, or not. I don’t think it matters that you also get something out of it. I just assume that is the way it is supposed to be.
 
Maximus_Power said:
There are no true selfless acts among men. Even people who perform altruistic acts for complete strangers are doing, so because it gives them a c sense of joy knowing that they are doing a good deed. Aka a life in exchange for joy.

The only exception to this rule would be Jesus and Mary due to the fact that they were born with without original sin and truely innocent victims.

Does this sound right to you?

It sounds logical, but it makes me feel uneasy
Click to expand...
People seek a good from everything they do.

But are they doing what is virtuous and in accordance with their nature or selfish and contrary to their nature? I’d use different words.
 
Maximus_Power said:
There are no true selfless acts among men.
Click to expand...
I think that with our broken human nature, there are many people who act selflessly as best they can with our woundedness and there is great merit in that. No one gets joy out of being up in the middle of the night because someone is sick. No one looks back and says ‘Boy I was awesome last week when the kids had the flu’. When we take care of what is ours to take care of, and it’s hard, this is a wonderful way that our ordinary can be united with Christ to make an act extra ordinary. Supernatural even. Everything can be offered to Christ for the conversion of sinners and peace in this world as our blessed Mother asked at Fatima. This is what we are called to do. Because of Christ’s infinite merit on the cross, we can bring that grace into a situation and impact the world. Even in our sinfulness, our poverty, our brokenness. This is the good news of Christ with us. This is our poor few fish and loaves that Christ receives and he feeds the 5,000. That’s our story today, and it’s awesome to think about. I am that little boy in that story, and that is joy.
 
Their joy is the joy of love. For faith without charity bears no fruit. So nothing wrong with it.
 
@Maximus_Power

Correct. There are ulterior motives to why we do what we do. God will use the slightest flicker of charity and then build upon it.

The closer a soul moves to God through purgatory on Earth or in Purgatory, the more pure their intentions become.

This is widely accepted in spirituality.
 
Last edited:
Even Jesus did what He did because to do otherwise, to disobey the Father’s will, would cause unbearable pain; bearing the passion was preferable to that. Love can demand a choice between greater and lesser evils-and we tend more towards godliness as our choices are for the greatest good. And that is always commendable.
 
Last edited:
For me it is unlikely to be for joy. Joy, if it happens, is a by-product, not the goal. It is more likely that I did it out of habit, thoughtlessly, or that I did it because I think that the world is better that way. So my ulterior motive is likely a sense of being in tune with what I believe. Either that or some type of fear.

I feel that those types of ulterior motives change over time, lessening overall (hopefully).
 
Maximus_Power said:
There are no true selfless acts among men. Even people who perform altruistic acts for complete strangers are doing, so because it gives them a c sense of joy knowing that they are doing a good deed. Aka a life in exchange for joy.

The only exception to this rule would be Jesus and Mary due to the fact that they were born with without original sin and truely innocent victims.

Does this sound right to you?

It sounds logical, but it makes me feel uneasy
Click to expand...
Your argument assumes that people doing altruistic acts always feel joy, which is not the case.

Further you assume that there can only ever be one motive for a given act: but in fact someone might have multiple reasons for the same act.
 
metanoia1 said:
The title of this thread is a ridiculous statement.
Click to expand...
And, unless giving qualification, your post is equally as ridiculous…more appropriately would have been "The title of this thread is a ridiculous statement BECAUSE…
 
okay I’ll bite and play by your rules. The title of this thread is a ridiculous statement because simply put it is false. As an example a young person (boy or girl) riding their bicycle falls, gets hurt and begins to cry. A witness to the accident (let’s say you) goes over to help the child up and make sure all is well. Once your sure the kid is okay he/she pedals off. You feel relieved for the kid and happy he/she was only shaken up. You continue on your way and barely give the incident another thought. However you felt a sense of gratification for helping another being in time of need. That was not the intention but was a result. This does lessen it as a selfless act. I believe it was a selfless act.
 
Well, we either act for self or we act for God (and by extension, the “other.”). “Selfless” essentially means human-less.
 
I look at the issue in a more global sense, as it applies to my life. Either I choose to live life with intent to help others get along in life, or I don’t. It is a binary choice.

Since I choose to help others along, then when I do it, each time I walk away feeling good that I worked towards my goal in that respect. I make the choice to live that way, because otherwise my life would feel like crap to me. Like a waste.

So, yes, the good feeling I get from helping people is both a goal and a natural result of the way I try to live my life. It is a perfect combination.

I am not sure I understand why I am getting the vibe from the posts here that some people see that as a bad thing, or selfish.
 
This is where Richard Dawkins and the doctrine of total depravity have common ground.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top