Are people fundamentally selfish?
Hi everyone.
In one of my classes we were having this discussion, and we were trying to get at the idea whether people are innately selfish, meaning they ultimately do things that benefit or gratify themselves, or whether they are innately social (inclined towards the group one is part of, such as a society, or a class of people), meaning their actions were based on their surrounding environment (not excluding selfish behavior, but also validates altruistic behavior).
Sociability is kind of still ambiguous right now, so I'll try to explain it but i'm still not sure myself. Basically, humans are naturally inclined towards cooperation with others because it benefits them both (This is different from cooperating only for your own personal gain). A person would naturally want to benefit another by assuming that feelings such as empathy, and remorse are natural (do not need to be taught or socially conditioned to exist in a person). These two emotions basically make a person aware when another person is suffering, and since one wouldn't want the other person to suffer, he would do something that attempts to relieve the suffering. Sociability does not mean everything a person does is for the benefit of others, it means everything a person does is done with emotional consideration of their environment. For example, I can be friends with someone just because I want to help study with them to help me, but they are also benefiting from it. The motivation behind it is really important. The difference in innate sociability and innate selfishness is whether I want to study with them because it will benefit me, mostly, and maybe the other person but I don't care as much, or, I want to study with them because it will benefit us both equally.
Assuming humans were fundamentally social, the argument for altruism would be that a person would save the drowning man simply because he doesn't want the man to drown. He values the life of another person as much as his own, and whatever the savior would want for himself (which in this case is life), he would want for the other man, so he saves him. (This is [b]not[/b] the same as wanting to save the other person because if you were in the same situation, you would want someone to save you. )
The explanation for altruistic behavior, assuming humans were fundamentally selfish, was that actions that seemed altruistic really weren't. For example, jumping into a lake to save someone is potentially risking your own survival for the sake of another, but a person would do that in order to receive gratification from the other person and maybe a future favor in return (maybe like a tip to his employer to hire you or something like that). Also the social stigma and negativity directed towards the person if he did not try and save them drowning man is a factor.
Basically, I just want to hear your thoughts. It doesn't matter how much you type. This summary is a really truncated version of what was discussed, so I know there will probably be a lot of ambiguity and questions. I know there are a lot of other factors and things, but I don't really want to get all argu-ey. Feel free to modify any of the definitions to help explain a thing if you want. And, thank you for your time.
TL;DR
Do people generally do things for selfish reasons or for reasons determined by their environment? Example: Do you go to school because you know it will increase your chances of getting a good job in order to benefit yourself, or because you know that whatever you're doing will somehow benefit or enrich society/humanity/someone other than yourself/etc.
15 Comments • Newest first
Everyone has a degree of selfishness, but some have it more than others. There are people that give up their lives to save others and I don't see that as selfish in any way.
as much as Locke talked about all this social contract stuff and how people would bond together to benefit for the common good, I would agree more with Hobbes, in that there are far more selfish reasons for which we do things.
@xaznninja wont let me out to play
@YoukaiHito: yeah idk its sorta weird to me how gratifying yourself somehow has to be a separate concept from gratifying other people, as if they were opposing each other. It's not selfish when you are benefiting someone else with the intent of benefiting, it's literally the opposite of what selfish means, inadvertently benefiting yourself doesn't take away from that
idk you can try comparing ppl to other social animals like canines or something
@SoggyToast
Yeah, that was what I was trying to get at but I didn't really do a good job of it. Self gratification isn't always a bad thing, because it is possible for it to benefit other people. I think I focused too much on the altruism thing. And the happy reaction you get from helping other people is part of the innately social view, because it was supposed to emphasize communal empathy, happiness, etc. as opposed to just personal happiness, such as gratifying yourself.
It's just really difficult for me to explain because a lot of people say that even though you help other people, it's a selfish action because you benefit yourself. But, i feel like it's weird to look at it in just terms of yourself, because you [i]are[/i] benefiting the other person when you do something for them. Like, your actions do have an effect on others, so anything you do can positively or negatively affect others. The innately social view is supposed to be that people will generally do things that positively affect others as well as themselves, because people just need other people in their lives to function as a human being. And, that leads to altruism because people are willing to give up some selfish desires for the benefit of the group.
selfishiness means you don't consider others ** i don't think altruism is selfish, lots of people do nice things without other people knowing or getting anything in return just to see a happy reaction which is satisfying
i think its more about self gratification/egoism, which are sort of different, i think when you do things for others you're projecting yourself onto other people
and i don't think that's bad
I dont think you can survive without some greed or selfishness but yes some people only do things for themselves.
I know that Dolphins are altruistic.
Yes, I agree that a person needs to have some level of selfishness, but my argument is more like arguing for a less extreme side, the social one, as opposed to the completely selfish one. I'm sorry if I wasn't that clear. Sociability includes selfishness as well as altruism. Making another person suffer less benefits both you and the other, but the argument is that main motive is to make the other person not suffer, not clear your conscience. Raising yourself up in society usually means you have a larger influence on the lives of others, so in the social view you would want to try and do things that don't have a negative effect on them, even if you're still benefiting yourself.
Aah, I feel like I worded everything wrong. I'm not really good at expressing ideas.
We talked about this during our discussions about The Great Gatsby in my sophomore honors English class. I don't know why but we did.
I, along with my teacher, were probably the only ones who actually thought people do everything for personal gain.
With all of the arguments of "what if I saved a drowning man just because I didn't want him to die." Well, that's also personal gain, because if didn't save them and you could have, or you thought about it, then you'd feel guilty or sad. So, you saved them. Even if you think you didn't do it for your own emotions, how could you prove that.
So yes, every decision one makes is "selfish". You wouldn't make a decision unless it benefits your survival, or your emotions.
Unless you're insane, but that's why those people are considered insane.
It's usually about selfishness. Not saying that people don't do nice things, but they only do nice things when it has a neutral/positive effect on themselves.
basic theme in my anthro class is that people are assholes.
if you had the opportunity to move up in society, more often than not, you will. It's rare that people with money/resources/power live humbly.
a person needs to have some level of selfishness in order to get ahead in life. always giving will always leave you with nothing in the end, not even a home.
"Wouldn't [i]want[/i] the other person to suffer". You don't want it, therefore, their lack of suffering is benefiting you by making you feel at ease. Still innately selfish.
Everybody is selfish in that regard(?) Might be altering the definition of "selfish" to fit this argument though, but whatever.
human nature = be selfish & survive