Humans: The most selfish of them all

I mean it literally, we humans are the most selfish beings living on the face of Earth. Forget the interactions out of our human kind, let us consider within the human sphere.

Everything we do is a act of self-act, there is no such thing as self-less, maybe some look like that on the outside, but the ultimate goal is selfish.

I am not blaming people that they are selfish or they were brought that way (may they were), but I blaming our genes for making us this selfish.

Yes, that selfishness has let us successfully evolve and be what we are, but do we really need a life that is living off others, I don't know about that.

Comments or Criticism?

>>but I blaming our genes for making us this selfish.

when was the last time any other animal ran into a burning building to save another animal?

Animals are just as selfish if not more. Animals dont help out the sick and old they eat them. Animals have wars just like humans they invade land steal resources from each other fight all the time.

Humans sometimes dont see it that way they just see it as nature but its all the same. When a weed invades another plants area it just the same as a human stealing someones land.

[edit on 10-9-2004 by ShadowXIX]

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Animals are just as selfish if not more. Animals dont help out the sick and old they eat them. Animals have wars just like humans they invade land steal resources from each other fight all the time.

exactly.

nature is where the selfishness is. because survival is a selfish act.

look around you - there are selfless acts by people all the time.

Even some of the worst action that humans have done animals have been doing for far longer. For example slavery most people would think only humans could think up such a act.

Meet the Slave maker Ants
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The small ant been making slaves for a long time

to blame our gene�s or nature for our selfishness is just exusues for conservatives and liberals. true a some point we do have a "him or me" outogear somewere in our minds. but humans are first and formost a social animal, a part of a unity that works together for the benefit of all in the group. sadly a couple millenia�s worth of "reprograming" of civilaization to enhance our selfish instincs to normalize the (exuse the melodrama) evil of the ones in power have left its mark
one thinks that 2-300 years of evolution is nothing in the long run but we are evolving all the time to adapt to our surroundings. despite what some people would have you belive we are born with a clean sheet, hitlers children would have been no diffrent from ghandi�s.
it doesn�t matter all that much by who or were you were reized so long as you have some access to the rest of the world you�ll go mainstream with the constant hammering of the (mainly) west: you are worth more than that guy, you are special, you are better, consume, consume, consume!
other would say: well our way maybe sucks but its better than communism, cause everything that resembles leftist ideology is doomed to fall like ussr.
first of all, communism is an extrem, and like all extreems no mattrer how well it goes in the begining , it will fall if its not adapted to new times.
And besides how long time did we give the far left? 2 generations?
we must allow our selves to chance oursurrondings,if we change our surrondings we will also change..



[edit on 10-9-2004 by disturbence]

[edit on 10-9-2004 by disturbence]

Selfish is not the best word to describe humans, because anything, by nature, is selfish.

However, I would say that humans are definitely the world's deadliest predators. There is absolutely no question about that.

Originally posted by quango
when was the last time any other animal ran into a burning building to save another animal?

True, but that doesn't really prove whether we're selfish or not.

yes, animals are selfish too

but we are still very selfish. i will be flamed for this, but i think even people who run into burning buildings are selfish too. of course they are being selfless at the same time, but i think much of it has to do with saving themselves from future greif due to a lost loved one, or even just guilt from knowing they could have saved a stranger but didnt. obviously these are not concious well thought out decisions, but spur of the moment frantic ones. 9 out of 10 action we do, deep down we have a personal investment. granted, i still commend those who run into burning buildings, but i just think it very rare to witness a completely selfless act.

go on and flame.

-lost

[edit on 10-9-2004 by lost]

Originally posted by lost
yes, animals are selfish too

but we are still very selfish. i will be flamed for this, but i think even people who run into burning buildings are selfish too. of course they are being selfless at the same time, but i think much of it has to do with saving themselves from future greif due to a lost loved one, or even just guilt from knowing they could have saved a stranger but didnt. obviously these are not concious well thought out decisions, but spur of the moment frantic ones. 9 out of 10 action we do, deep down we have a personal investment. granted, i still commend those who run into burning buildings, but i just think it very rare to witness a completely selfless act.

go on and flame.

-lost

[edit on 10-9-2004 by lost]

Dude, you are not wrong at all!

People sort of stretch the meaning of selfishness. People see selfishness as exactly the same as greediness. However, selfish simply means "self-serving." So yes, running into a building to save someone's life is selfish, because what you're doing is you're doing something you "want." There is no such thing as doing something you don't want to. You do as you're told even if you don't want to, because you don't want to get in trouble. So obviously selfish.

Not to say this selfishness is bad. I call it "positive selfishness." But it is still selfish.

Selfishness is the root of all action.

So yes, like you say, bring on the world of flamers!

Us and rats are two of a kind. We are just like rats, or rats are like us.

[edit on 10/2/2004 by esther]

We help each other because society has conditioned us to do so.

In ancient times it was survival, the sick and elderly was left to die alone, and this included sick new borns.

Read the ancient tribes and ancient man and you will see that we used to do in ancient times what was the best for the survival of the tribes.

This planet would be better off without mankind. That's about as self-less as you can get. ::exits stage while dodging fruit::

Any and all animals will ONLY act upon that which promotes THEIR existence and beliefs. It's called self-preservation. Nothing new here! The only difference with humans is that we believe we are better then that.

For example, Mother Terisa performed all sorts of acts which are seen as compasionate or selfless. This however is false. These so called selfless acts promoted her own selfish (because it related directlly to her) belief system which reinforced her reality of who she was (who she wished to be) which shone her existence in a positive light to herself which promoted her existence.

There are only two reasons why anyone does anything. Because they want to (selfishness for the sake of promoting a positive existence) or because they feel they have too (selfishness for the sake of avoiding a negative existence). Don't fool yourself with pride into thinking any differently.

Originally posted by marg6043
We help each other because society has conditioned us to do so.

In ancient times it was survival, the sick and elderly was left to die alone, and this included sick new borns.

Read the ancient tribes and ancient man and you will see that we used to do in ancient times what was the best for the survival of the tribes.

home.entouch.net...

It has long been known that Neanderthal's show much evidence of treating their companions with compassion and care. Klein (1989, p. 334) writes:

"However, the same skeletal pathologies and injuries that show that the Neanderthals lived risky lives and aged early also reveal a strikingly 'human' feature of their social life. The La Chapelle-aux-Saints and Shanidar 1 individuals, for example, must have been severely incapacitated and would have died even earlier without substantial help and care from their comrades. This implicit group concern for the old and sick may have permitted Neanderthals to live longer than any of their predecessors, and it is the most recognizably human, nonmaterial aspect of their behavior that can be directly inferred from the archeological record."

Comment:

Survival has a great deal to say about dependabillity and even trust among primative ancients, including Neanderthal in the social formulae. To do otherwise is obviously a matter of even more extreme conditions, and even the falsehoods of a social group pretending to be "an extreme condition." I can think of no actuality more demanding than that of the Neanderthals, so things probably never got "that bad," for anyone else. It is all a matter of ignorance.

Yes I am aware of a documetary even on TV was a shown very interesting, but through ancient history is also evidence of the way tribes behavior against the sick and incapacitated also plays a role on human priorities.

Great posts so far!

I think people need to understand that selfishness is gray. You cannot call selfishness "bad." It's a myth that disrupts understanding of human behavior.

Freud's model of psychosexual development has dropped from favor, but I think there is much to appreciate from his model. It might help to explain why humans are so selfish and at the same time so altruistic. I think the Florida hurricanes are a good crucible in which to observe the the dichotomous nature of humans. Even before the hurricane strikes the altruistic nature of man is evident in the services available to those who will be impacted. Afterwared, there are the Red Cross and the Salvation Army and other altrusistc agencies who provide services. But, then there are also the price gougers and the building trade scam artists who descend on the state to take advantage of the plight of those stricken.