One friend of mine pointed out that selfishness, may not be inherently bad. If you are a long time reader of this journal, then you know that I have brought this possibility up a great many times, and I certainly feel that there is truth to this. To act against your own person, I feel defies the very reason for your existence, whatever that may be. From a religious standpoint, if God created you, then working against yourself is working against the creation that he made. From a more atheist standpoint, there is no real reason to tear yourself down. My personal belief (and the one expressed by this friend) is that the only time selfishness becomes a problem is when you are willing to destroy others for your own gain. Now this is a dangerous statement to make, because at what point do you draw the line. If someone will get hurt if you don't do something, but you will definitely get hurt if you do, whose needs and life takes priority? The selfish thing would be to evaluate whether or not the pain you will feel afterwards will be greater. For example if you were to let your mother feel pain instead of you, one might assume that your anguish and guilt later on would indeed be greater, and thus you should take the pain. With a stranger, that might not work the same. While I think there is truth in this, there is certainly no clear answer.
One thing that was brought is that it all goes to intentions. To quote: "If you're doing something because of personal satisfaction or boosting of ego, or what not... Then I'd guess it's selfish.. But if you truly are doing something because you CARE..." This response is funny because in the song in Wicked that I quoted last time, one of the later lines is that "My road of good intentions lead where all such roads lead," drawing on the old phrase that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. For one, I think there is a huge risk of moral superiority trumping all else, like CRUSADES, WITCH HUNTS, etc. I would venture to say that at least SOME of the people involved in there was because they were doing what they thought was a selfless act towards something or someone else. Even beyond that though there is the question that arises is it ok to do something bad if you do it because you care? Is it ok to hurt someone if it will help them later? Finally, I think that the point I tried to make last time was that if you are doing it because you CARE, you are still doing it to provoke feelings that you like. Though indeed the cause may seem more warm and fuzzy than say boosting your ego, the truth is that the meaning is the same: You are doing something for someone else that will make you feel better, or avoid you feeling bad. So how does that make one any better or worse? Is it because one feeling is "better" than another? Hmmm...
Finally the last I want to comment on is that of God's role in all of this. I was presented with a question of whether or not we were created by God with no benefit to Him, or if indeed we were created in His own image for some purpose of His own. Now the interesting thing brought up by this is that if God did indeed have a purpose in creating us, and didn't expend the energy for nothing, and if indeed we were created in His image, than by his own example, we are incapable of making a selfless act. On the flip side was the fact that indeed our goal was to overcome the fact that most acts are selfish and find the ability to make a "true" selfless act. That certainly would appease most churches (and in my opinion, excuse them from the many acts they commit that are very selfish in nature) but I am not sure that I buy it. I think that there is a clear delineation. Either there are selfless acts or their aren't. The thought of striving towards something that might not, and more importantly should not exist is rather hellish to me.
I do indeed like the idea that was brought up about karma, and I think that most faiths in the world have some indication of this, but I don't think that it answers the question of good or wickedness. If I am trying to help someone, but things go bad, does that mean that I am going to get kindness, or harm coming back to me? Is it again, related to the intent, or maybe the action, or maybe the result? I think that this last question may be at the heart of any of these discussions. Which part of an action do you look at? Can they all be in line? I would say mostly they cannot, so which takes priority? Ah, thoughts for another day.
No comments:
Post a Comment