Is not acting out of self-interest a sign of mental illness?

Page 1 of 3 [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Is not acting out of self-interest a sign of mental illness? (i.e. the more you don't act out of self-interest the more mentally ill are you thinking)
More yes than no 28%  28%  [ 9 ]
More no than yes 72%  72%  [ 23 ]
Total votes : 32

qawer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,252

03 Apr 2013, 9:03 pm

Do you think not acting out of self-interest is a sign of mental illness?

I am not talking about helping your parents lawning the grass or helping your brother with an essay assignment. These actions indirectly help yourself given that you have some kind of relationship with them.

I am talking about actions that will not have any positive influence on your own life whatsoever (or where you knowingly could have spent your time on other things that would have benefited you a lot more). That is, doing things without always considering whether it is going to benefit yourself in the end.

Rationally, the more you act on self-interest, the better is your life going to become. The less you do it, the worse is it going to become.

For instance, voluntary work, should one do this? Only if it makes you feel like a person with enough energy to work without being paid for it? So in the end only to make yourself look better, not because you really want to do something good for others/the society...when you at the other hand have paid work as the alternative.



uwmonkdm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2013
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 764
Location: Canada

03 Apr 2013, 9:12 pm

If not acting out of self-interest is a sign of mental illness, 90%+ of the population of North America is mentally ill.



whirlingmind
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,130
Location: 3rd rock from the sun

03 Apr 2013, 9:27 pm

No I don't think that! 8O


_________________
*Truth fears no trial*

DX AS & both daughters on the autistic spectrum


redrobin62
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,009
Location: Seattle, WA

03 Apr 2013, 9:32 pm

Volunteering to make oneself look better? Maybe, but to whom? I've talked to a few volunteers at the local food pantries over the years. They pretty much indicated they volunteered because they had nothing else to do and it was a great way to pass the time and make new friends. Some were already retired and a few had disabilities.



xMistrox
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 255

03 Apr 2013, 9:43 pm

Politics in America play a large part in it with Republicans vs Demoncrats. Personally I believe in parts on both philosophies. Sometimes acting for the majority of humans is not the best for the planet or may remedy a roblem in the short term, but make things worse in the long run, and sometimes acting for yourself can benefit others, such as creating jobs or progressing technology that can benefit others. I tend to lean more for altruism though.


_________________
BAP: 103 aloof / 100 rigid / 103 pragmatic
AQ: 40 EQ: 8 SQ: 114
Aspie: AS-156/200 NT-56/200
RAADS-R: 189 total
Diagnosed 9/2013


Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

03 Apr 2013, 9:45 pm

qawer wrote:
Do you think not acting out of self-interest is a sign of mental illness?

I am not talking about helping your parents lawning the grass or helping your brother with an essay assignment. These actions indirectly help yourself given that you have some kind of relationship with them.

I am talking about actions that will not have any positive influence on your own life whatsoever (or where you knowingly could have spent your time on other things that would have benefited you a lot more). That is, doing things without always considering whether it is going to benefit yourself in the end.

Rationally, the more you act on self-interest, the better is your life going to become. The less you do it, the worse is it going to become.

For instance, voluntary work, should one do this? Only if it makes you feel like a person with enough energy to work without being paid for it? So in the end only to make yourself look better, not because you really want to do something good for others/the society...when you at the other hand have paid work as the alternative.


No. But acting severely to one's detriment is. See the difference?

Is it a mental illness to work for a charity earning $30,000/year because you believe in the cause vs. working for a bank for $300,000/year? I would say not. You are not necessarily acting in your own self-interest by choosing one job or career path over the other purely out of concern for others, but it's not a mental illness.

Is it a mental illness if you argue inappropriately with your boss, fail to show up to work, and drop out of school in order to focus on playing video games? It could be.

See the difference? Not acting out of self interest vs. acting to one's detriment.



Apple_in_my_Eye
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: in my brain

03 Apr 2013, 10:04 pm

So, Mother Theresa and all Peace Corp. volunteers are either mentally ill or just trying to make themselves look good? Nice false choice, there. You sound like an Ayn Rand devotee.

Sometimes people do things that do not benefit themselves even when no one is looking. Maybe it's a cashier giving you a penny or a dime when you're a penny or dime short, or pulling over to the side of the road when you see an unattended accident on a back road.

While it may not immediately benefit the person doing those things, he/she could think that if they do that a little, and everybody else does it a little, then when he/she/you are stranded in a car during a flood someone may paddle a boat to get you. Sort of, if everyone "pays it forward" them everyone gets a small benefit, a bit like paying an insurance premium. In that sense, someone doing something that doesn't immediately benefit them, does benefit them.



Skilpadde
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,019

03 Apr 2013, 10:44 pm

no one does anything unless it benefits them somehow. They might not earn something from it directly, but they will look good to someone or feel good about themselves. There is no altruism.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahDxg3hc5pM[/youtube]

I agree with Joey.


_________________
BOLTZ 17/3 2012 - 12/11 2020
Beautiful, sweet, gentle, playful, loyal
simply the best and one of a kind
love you and miss you, dear boy

Stop the wolf kills! https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... 3091429765


Stoek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2012
Age: 94
Gender: Male
Posts: 762

03 Apr 2013, 11:21 pm

This all has to do with how you view self. If you believe yourself ends at your brain stem, then your gonna have a very different value than if you believe yourself ends at the level of human life.



Verdandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)

03 Apr 2013, 11:35 pm

Skilpadde wrote:
no one does anything unless it benefits them somehow. They might not earn something from it directly, but they will look good to someone or feel good about themselves. There is no altruism.


This is a fallacious rationalization. Altruism exists, and people are capable of it. History is filled with examples.

I do not know what one gets out of insisting that altruism doesn't exist, or that feeling good about doing something altruistic somehow negates its value as altruism.



Skilpadde
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,019

03 Apr 2013, 11:59 pm

Verdandi wrote:
Skilpadde wrote:
no one does anything unless it benefits them somehow. They might not earn something from it directly, but they will look good to someone or feel good about themselves. There is no altruism.


This is a fallacious rationalization. Altruism exists, and people are capable of it. History is filled with examples.

I do not know what one gets out of insisting that altruism doesn't exist, or that feeling good about doing something altruistic somehow negates its value as altruism.


Of course it negates it. If it makes you feel good (or if you're trying to impress someone), then it has nothing to do with altruism. You do it for your own gain. If it had made you feel bad, you wouldn't have done it.


_________________
BOLTZ 17/3 2012 - 12/11 2020
Beautiful, sweet, gentle, playful, loyal
simply the best and one of a kind
love you and miss you, dear boy

Stop the wolf kills! https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... 3091429765


Highlander852456
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 1 Apr 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 301
Location: Bratislava

04 Apr 2013, 12:06 am

Altruism is cooperative ability. Autist are not good at this. However there are many aspects of this.



Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

04 Apr 2013, 12:12 am

uwmonkdm wrote:
If not acting out of self-interest is a sign of mental illness, 90%+ of the population of North America is mentally ill.


Definitely much of the Tea Party/rural poor is with respect to their voting behavior!



Skilpadde
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,019

04 Apr 2013, 12:16 am

Highlander852456 wrote:
Altruism is cooperative ability.


No, it has nothing to do with cooperation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism
Quote:
Altruism or selflessness is the principle or practice of concern for the welfare of others. It is a traditional virtue in many cultures and a core aspect of various religious traditions, though the concept of "others" toward whom concern should be directed can vary among cultures and religions. Altruism or selflessness is the opposite of selfishness.
Altruism can be distinguished from feelings of duty and loyalty. Altruism is a motivation to provide something of value to a party who must be anyone but one's self, while duty focuses on a moral obligation towards a specific individual (e.g., a god, a king), or collective (e.g., a government). Pure altruism consists of sacrificing something for someone other than the self (e.g. sacrificing time, energy or possessions) with no expectation of any compensation or benefits, either direct, or indirect (e.g., receiving recognition for the act of giving).
Much debate exists as to whether "true" altruism is possible. The theory of psychological egoism suggests that no act of sharing, helping or sacrificing can be described as truly altruistic, as the actor may receive an intrinsic reward in the form of personal gratification. The validity of this argument depends on whether intrinsic rewards qualify as "benefits."
The term altruism may also refer to an ethical doctrine that claims that individuals are morally obliged to benefit others. Used in this sense, it's usually contrasted to egoism, which is defined as acting to the benefit of one's self.


_________________
BOLTZ 17/3 2012 - 12/11 2020
Beautiful, sweet, gentle, playful, loyal
simply the best and one of a kind
love you and miss you, dear boy

Stop the wolf kills! https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... 3091429765


qawer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,252

04 Apr 2013, 5:54 am

Apple_in_my_Eye wrote:
Sometimes people do things that do not benefit themselves even when no one is looking. Maybe it's a cashier giving you a penny or a dime when you're a penny or dime short, or pulling over to the side of the road when you see an unattended accident on a back road.

While it may not immediately benefit the person doing those things, he/she could think that if they do that a little, and everybody else does it a little, then when he/she/you are stranded in a car during a flood someone may paddle a boat to get you. Sort of, if everyone "pays it forward" them everyone gets a small benefit, a bit like paying an insurance premium. In that sense, someone doing something that doesn't immediately benefit them, does benefit them.


But in the end you only do this for other people with the expectation that they would do the same for you. So if you never needed someone to do this for you, would it still be rational to do this for others?

Seems like you should never want do it just because you really want to help others, but eventually only to help out yourself.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want it to be this way, but it does seem to be that way. It's the same with love. There is no love. Everyone is just in it for selfish reasons unless there is something wrong with them. :hmph:

That's why I often consider love between some autistics to be more "true": because there basically is something "wrong" with them, according to society.

It's difficult for me to not see the world as a bunch of selfish people, who think they care for each other, but eventually all they care about is themselves: they only care about others because they care about themselves. But I guess you should just love yourself immensely and play along in this hideous game. If you become selfish enough it will not be a problem for you. That's the key, and that's why most people don't see a problem with it. Because they truly are selfish to the bone.

If you really want to find unselfish people you have to go to an institution for mentally ill people. They are about to be "cured" for their unselfishness so they can get more healthy (i.e. more selfish and self-serving).



qawer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,252

04 Apr 2013, 6:35 am

On the other hand, one could also ask whether you really love yourself if you don't always act out of self-interest.

Not acting out of self-interest is in some way to say that you love others more than you love yourself.


It becomes that "truly loving yourself" vs. "truly loving others" battle: are you part of another person's life or are they a part of your life. You can't do both at the same time because when the focus of your actions goes to one part it disappears from the other.

To be healthy that battle should always be won by "truly loving yourself".