It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does one have the right to be selfish?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777
Case in point:

Right now my girlfriend is miserable and stressed. Her son is a tyrant that won't let her go anywhere or do anything. He refuses to be babysat by others, refuses to hang out with grandma, refuses to go to daycare, refuses to let her go on vacation, etc.

What can she do?

She can grow a pair of ovaries and actually discipline the child.



I hate to say this, but having a child can be one of the WORST mistakes and WORST things that ever happens to you. You lose all your freedom, just as if you joined the army, and can't do anything about it, esp if your kid is like a tyrant who controls you.

Um, no. You don't actually have any kids, right? So, you are going on the actions of your girlfriend and her lack of control over her son.

My children do not act like that because I do not let them. They are awesome, and are the BEST thing that has ever happened to me. What "freedom" did I lose? To go out and get drunk any day of the week? I didn't do that anyway, so I don't feel like I lost out on anything.



What can she do? How can she break free of her son?

She can get a clue and actually be a parent.



I know it sounds bad, but children are VERY ENSLAVING. It's one of the worst predicaments cause there's no way out. You can quit a job, quit a marriage, but you can't quit children. How can you break free?

From your post, it's obvious to me that you want to be with the girlfriend but not have to deal with the girlfriend's son. I'm sorry to say it, but the child will always be with the girlfriend unless she abandons him for you. So, either deal with it or get another girlfriend.

Have you ever tried spending time with the kid? Have you considered that he might actually be a good kid but since he has no father doesn't know how to act like a good kid? Instead of bitching and moaning about your girlfriend having to take care of her child, why don't you try to help her out?

If you don't want a family and you don't want children, then don't have a girlfriend who wants a family and who has a child.

Seems fairly simple to me.



Why doesn't society ever warn us about the neverending enslavement of children? It's a cruel scam.

Have you been living in a fantasy world all your life? Or, are you just now entering the world of adulthood..? Because, most people learn early on that life isn't as peachy as it appears on TV.



I certainly wouldn't want to be enslaved in servitude to a child. I have zero interest in doing so. I have no desire for self-sacrifice. What can you do?

Clearly, you want to be selfish. Again, get a new girlfriend who does not have children. If you can't do that, then learn to love the kid.



I think some people do have a desire to self-sacrifice. Parents usually have this desire. But I guess some don't have this desire. Perhaps they lack a "self-sacrificing" gene?

No, the child is not your child. If he were your child, you might feel differently because it would then be in your best interest to rear and care for the child so your genetic material lives on.

There is no "self-sacrifice" gene. You can be someone who cares for others and takes responsibility for your own actions, or you can be someone who is selfish and irresponsible in all things. Or, you can be a mixture of the two and show that you care about people by taking the time to understand them, yet not allowing yourself to be walked on.




posted on May, 21 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by OhZone
Agreed!
And I can tell you that being a parent NEVER ends. Guess who is spending life savings on currently unemployed due to economy son. !/4th of it gone already. Being old is bad enough.

Now, there is a huge difference between being a parent and babying your kids. Honestly, you're all bitter because you "have to" take care of your son... but, you don't really have to. You're just doing it because you'd feel guilty otherwise. There's a point when you need to send your kids off to be responsible. Spending your life savings on an unemployed (read: refuses to work menial labor) adult child is your own fault.



Those who call you selfish are just mad because you didn't yield to their attempts to manipulate you.

Or, you're actually being selfish to the point of hurting others.



I know some people who are selfless and have taken into their homes various friends and sometimes strangers who were down and out.
Well, results were that they ate for free and stole stuff.
A homeless woman with an infant--This lady couldn't just let them on the street. So she took them in.
Next day the woman's boyfriend came by to pick up her and baby, along with TV, and some jewelry and tools.
Selfless to a fault, always getting ripped off.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Point being: if a person is gullible and trusting, thus not using his/her brain and instincts, then it is his/her own fault that things continuously go badly.

If your selfless friends haven't learn that they will get ripped off by vagrants, then you can either remind them of the last thieves and encourage them to learn from their mistakes or just let them continue to get ripped off. There's not much you can do about it if they are doing these things willfully.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


I've thought about this a lot. I'm currently stuck with these 3 ideologies.

In order of most likely to least likely:
-God(s) will eventually give everyone what they want, so adhere to whatever lessons you can from him/them to gain favor. (be selfless)

-God doesn't exist, mankind will never figure out how to survive for all eternity in a finite universe, and the only justifiable law should be do whatever you will. (be selfish)

-Mankind will find a way to create a perpetual motion device before all resources in the universe are consumed, so we should live with aspirations of hope and good will towards one another so that that day will be possible. (be selfless)

edit on 21-5-2012 by Bleeeeep because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


what does it mean to give to others? today we we are all giving from a place where we are not full so when we give that means we have less as a result. does this really make sense?

if we were all aligned with the true self (no ego..) we would each be independently empowered/ self sufficient. this means there would be no dependency and the idea of being selfish or whatever it is that we think selfish means would go away completely.

if our heart was open we would be connected fully to the divine or the source of all that is and as a result our entire world would be overflowing with abundance of all kinds. love, joy, peace, vitality, health, life, abundance, etc... that there would be no need to give.... or we would be giving from such a full place that to give would not mean to sacrifice or to have less than as a result.

selfishness is an illusion. part of the ego. a result of an individual who is not empowered. a result of a creator who does not know he is creating and does not know that he is looking to an untrue source as the source of what he is creating. if you are creating your world and were fully connected to your ability to create whatever it is that you want to create what in the world would there be to ever sacrifice for another? we would all be creating exactly what we want to be creating. period. to demand or expect another to give to us and as a result have less themselves because we ourselves do not have enough and then call that person or those people selfish because they do not give in to our expectations and demands is insanity. this dynamic can only exist when we do not know that we are creating our experience and as a result are not taking responsibility for what we are looking to as our source of power (mind versus heart, physical world versus the divine).



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
I use to be quite selfish when I was younger, and truth be told, I was much happier since I put myself first.

Now, Im not selfish at all, and people just like to step all over me and run amok. If only I can find a way to be selfish again, I would, In a heartbeat, but I dont think its in me anymore.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777
Question:

Does one have the right to be selfish? Why does society act as though one were obligated to be unselfish? It's not possible to force someone to care about others if he doesn't right? Isn't this an unrealistic expectation?

Besides, isn't it wrong to force someone to compromise or sacrifice his interests, life, freedom, resources, needs, etc. for the benefit of others? What if he doesn't want to? Why should he force himself to do something he doesn't want to do? Especially if these "others" don't include his friends or family.

Isn't is self-destructive to be too selfless and only care about others but not about yourself? If so, why doesn't society consider that a bad thing too?

Key point: If everyone wants you to do something that you don't, should you give in, or should you listen to yourself and be selfish? Is one obligated to do something one doesn't want to do, just because everyone else says so?


You just got through 2/3 of Atlas Shrugged, didn't you.

Did you know that when Ayn Rand was a little girl they removed her clitoris, and on that spot they tattooed a finger pointing up at her and laughing at her? True story. I think that explains a few things, if you know what I mean.

If you decide to make selfishness a way of life, then we're free to take what we want from you if you can't prevent us from doing so. If selfishness is okay, then get ready to deal with defending everything you have. And you can't crybaby about it, either. Well, you can, but it won't make any difference. We have just as much a right to be completely self-serving as you do. The cool part is that there are more of us that there are of you, so we'll just help ourselves to whatever you collect.

Most ideologies fail in real life application. Selfishness is one of those ideologies. You eventually lose to someone who is more selfish than even you are. Your life turns into a 1970s space invaders video game that keeps you screaming at everything until you finally lose.

But yes, it is your right to lose. No one is required to live a life that makes any sense whatsoever.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by blackmetalmist
I use to be quite selfish when I was younger, and truth be told, I was much happier since I put myself first.

Now, Im not selfish at all, and people just like to step all over me and run amok. If only I can find a way to be selfish again, I would, In a heartbeat, but I dont think its in me anymore.


You don't have to be selfish, you just have to be confident in yourself and your abilities.

If you know someone is trying to take advantage of you, do not let them. If you have found that someone has taken advantage of you without your knowledge, do not let it happen again.

It's not a mutually exclusive set of options. One doesn't have to be either selfless or selfish. Be selfish and do the things you need to do to feel happy. Be selfless and do the things you need to do to feel helpful and hopeful. Be yourself and be unafraid.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


Whether or not any of those options are true, you still have to exist on a level with other humans. What should one do to survive and flourish? Be selfish in some instances, be selfless in others, be aware at all times.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777

Originally posted by darkbake
reply to post by WWu777
 


I have a solution for your girlfriend's son. If he is autistic, she might want to find a sitter that is at least somewhat compatible with him, be reassuring with him the first few times, and keep the same sitter, that way he can get used to him or her and become more comfortable with the situation over time.

There might also be reasons that he doesn't like visiting his grandmother, including loud noises, unpredictable behavior, or something of the like.

Overall, a solution needs to be found for this problem, because letting him be in control of her like this is actually an unhealthy decision for his future, her life, and their relationship. There are probably creative solutions to this and other problems that crop up that she can utilize if she thinks about it a bit.


edit on 21-5-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-5-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)


He's not autistic. He just wants everything his way and doesn't take no for an answer. He just has a strong personality that wants his way. Grandma is just boring to him. He doesn't like to play with other kids too. I think he's an introvert and other kids bore him, esp since they are different than him and more simple.

I don't know what she can do. Why didn't society warn us about having kids? They trick us into thinking it's the most wonderful thing. But I've never found raising kids to be joyful or pleasurable in any way. Maybe I'm just different than everyone. There's just no excitement in raising a family. If you watch the "Vacation" movies with Chevy Chase, you'll see that family vacations are more stressful than fun.



The kid sounds like he's a lot like you. Maybe you two should get into some kind of f*ck-the-world-over partnership, and take advantage of the mutuality you both have with each other instead of competing with each other over the broad.

Or dump her and find a stripper who make $1K a night, who wants a guy that doesn't impose his own requirements on her (since no one should ever restrict anyone else...right?)

You're 17, aren't you. What on earth is that single mom thinking, having you around?


Damn. I was so much like you when I was young. It's funny as hell to read this stuff.
edit on 5/21/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I have the right to eat shellfish.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ottobot
 


I'm not 100% sure of what you're question entails. If I missed what you're saying let me know.

If you're implying that a selfish person cannot flourish: If I give you bread so you do not kill me, am I not being selfish still? ... I think sacrifices can be made by a selfish person for selfish reasons.

If you're implying a selfless person cannot flourish: I don't see why they couldn't. If everyone is selfless then they would prosper greatly I think. If selfless and selfish coexist then the selfless will grow as the selfish do because the selfish prosper from the selfless(this is basically why big governments don't just kill us all off right now or why a cattle farmer allows his herd to breed).



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
when what you wish takes from others wrongly it must be weighed by your need.If it is done by circumstance or accident that is part of life but if it is intentionally an effort to control or harm in some way ,you should try to avoid it.Other than that avoid all stress and you'll be Ok.
edit on 21-5-2012 by cavtrooper7 because: bad sentance



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I think humans are selfish by nature. Look at a toddler with a toy...No one taught them how to be that way, sharing is learned.Selfishness is OK in moderation. Never to the point that's how one would describe you.
To clarify I'm not saying I think ''It's alright to be selfish period'' but more ''Occasional selfishness is excusable because it is in our nature.'' Everyone is guilty of their moments.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


Well, what I meant is a person who acts "selfless" and takes it to the absolute extreme, where anyone can do anything to him/her and get away with it, s/he will not survive. A completely selfless person will die out quite quickly, after much suffering.

That said, it is pretty much impossible for a human to be entirely selfless. I say this because a truly selfless (devoted to others' welfare or interest and not one's own) person would commit suicide so that there was more food for other people, more air for other people, more water for other people.

Even Mother Teresa, for example, was quite selfish. She chose to help people because she wanted to, because it made her feel good, because she felt like it was her calling. She chose to be poor, she chose to live where she landed, and she chose to live as she pleased because she wanted to.

Selfishly being selfless.

This is what I mean: one must be both selfish and selfless to succeed.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


I should clarify that it can be rewarding to be unselfish and that it is a good way to build relationships and trust with people. Society is also better off when people as a whole are like this. But I don't think that taking care of yourself is necessarily selfish, see it doesn't get in the way of the former idea of being unselfish, does it?

In fact, sometimes taking care of yourself and leaving an abusive relationship or something similar and allowing yourself to grow opens up more opportunities for unselfish acts and thus increases altruism overall.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
replace selfish, with self centred.

so you are asking is it wrong to be centred in self?


There was a time, when being self centred kept you alive. You would consider those you felt loyal too and forget the rest.

nowdays lots of people seem to struggle with personal boundaries in many areas. Perhaps if they were centred in self and loyal only to those who they feel positive emotion for, our world would be a much happier more stable enviroment to live in.

Nowt wrong with being you and following your heart, as long as you are not intentionally hurting others with your choices!



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ottobot
 


So I guess you are opposed to the whole idea of natural law and embrace the worship of the collective. No thanks to your bee hive mentality.
My rights come from the Creator/nature/whatever you want to call it. "Society" can choose to accept that fact, shape policy around it, and prosper or it can decide that "society" makes all the rules and enforce a tyranny. Sounds like you prefer the latter.

Per the OP's original question: Absolutely.
Being forced by governmental action to "help" others is not compassion. It is tyranny.
A community that rewards acts of voluntary kindness and that uses sound policy to promote cooperation is bound to be a successful one. But that community should also promote competition and reward success.
A society that forces "compassion" tends to create a culture of dependent, entitled morons, hence the growing dependency rates in the U.S.
Decentralize.
Compassion is an individual or community function. Not central government's
edit on 21-5-2012 by pierregustavetoutant because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


I think everyone has a right to be selfish until it negatively impacts others in a malicious way.

If you want to fight to pay less taxes- more power to you. Why should you have to pay so much of what you work so hard for to a government that is unaccountable with your money?

On the other hand, if you are a corporation wanting to dump tons of toxic waste that would harm others just so you could profit, then to heck with you.

So it just depends on the scenario.



posted on May, 22 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by pierregustavetoutant
reply to post by ottobot
 


So I guess you are opposed to the whole idea of natural law and embrace the worship of the collective. No thanks to your bee hive mentality.


Learn to read before making this type of judgment, please. If you would take a minute to actually read my initial post (www.abovetopsecret.com...) in its entirety, you would see my stance on this issue before I read the OP's whiny post about his girlfriend spending more time with her child than with him.

In nature, OP would be the gamma-level male whom all of the alpha males beat on just to prove their strength.



My rights come from the Creator/nature/whatever you want to call it. "Society" can choose to accept that fact, shape policy around it, and prosper or it can decide that "society" makes all the rules and enforce a tyranny. Sounds like you prefer the latter.

Actually, I have stated that I do not care about society, as I do not believe we have any "rights" other than those which are condoned by society. I prefer to live my life as I see fit, which is as the person I am - not who "Society" wants me to be. I do not "fit in", and I feel no qualms about this.

Again, this is an interesting response and I'm not sure exactly which post you are replying to; however, your response here is full of assumption... though you do not actually understand my stance.



Per the OP's original question: Absolutely.
Being forced by governmental action to "help" others is not compassion. It is tyranny.
A community that rewards acts of voluntary kindness and that uses sound policy to promote cooperation is bound to be a successful one. But that community should also promote competition and reward success.
A society that forces "compassion" tends to create a culture of dependent, entitled morons, hence the growing dependency rates in the U.S.
Decentralize.
Compassion is an individual or community function. Not central government's.

I agree with this statement. Community and interpersonal relationships are key to survival, extensive government intervention leads to failure.
edit on 5/22/2012 by ottobot because: link



posted on May, 22 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Most of the time when someone calls you selfish it's because you are not giving them what they or their kind want. People use selfish as an excuse to control others. For the good of the people was created to protect those who take risks that they shouldn't have most times. I believe in helping those who truly need help or those who cannot help themselves for a real reason. I have friends that are mentally handicapped and they have held jobs all their lives. They didn't need handouts, they needed jobs they could do. Greedy is bad but selfish doesn't mean anything. I'm not selfish because I don't believe in doctors anymore, I just look at the people who aren't getting helped to see the self centeredness of the medical field. Can't these nurses and medical personal see that many Doctors aren't helping people? Why do we have to go to Mayo clinic to be helped.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join