whYNOT Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 Maybe others here would disagree with me -- I'm sure there are many people far more active "in the community," and therefore knowledgeable than I -- but no... I don't think there are many pure egoists. I certainly don't think that I've acted in a consistently egoistic manner, not even after adopting the "Objectivist" label for myself. Not to make excuses, but there's a whole lotta culture and upbringing to overcome. To see through it and work through it constantly requires fairly scrupulous effort. I expect I'll become stronger and better over time. To find happiness -- that is, true happiness which is in the context of a "well-lived life" -- a person must devote himself to its pursuit. That is, he must act selfishly. Avila asked if there are many, or any, pure egoists, against the background of are there pure Christians - and I think that is a highly significant question. No easy answer, since one can only speak for oneself. I think egoism is a direction you move in, rather than a completed state of mind, but some will disagree. Rand viewed egoism as the proper state for Man, and I've tested this day after day for a long time now. (That's just me - always reinventing the wheel...) Now I know she was right. For me happiness has much to do with a sense of certainty - not to be confused with being rigidly dogmatc, or never having doubt - about oneself and existence. It all begins and ends with Self. Additionally, when one sees the extraordinary mess and pain that individuals and entire societies endlessly repeat, the true culprit of anti-egoism starts becoming very clear. Rand, the ultimate egoist, had to be also an extremely caring person in my opinion - her brilliant mind could instantly access all that human tragedy, past, present, and future. Don Athos - good thoughts, above. I agree that it does seem (in your example) that Amtrak is innocuous enough. Except when you've seen enough history unfolding, the most innocent-looking, but comromised, principle will cause suffering and loss of liberty further down the line. This has been a fruitful and honest discussion between you and Avila. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avila Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 Avila asked if there are many, or any, pure egoists, against the background of are there pure Christians Just to clarify: the background was -- are there pure altruists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttime Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 Additionally, when one sees the extraordinary mess and pain that individuals and entire societies endlessly repeat, the true culprit of anti-egoism starts becoming very clear. Rand, the ultimate egoist, had to be also an extremely caring person in my opinion - her brilliant mind could instantly access all that human tragedy, past, present, and future. It's interesting that you seem to imply here that an egoist is not a caring person. Nothing could be further from the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whYNOT Posted August 23, 2011 Report Share Posted August 23, 2011 It's interesting that you seem to imply here that an egoist is not a caring person. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's interesting that you seem to think that I seem to imply that. Nothing could be ...etc, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whYNOT Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 Just to clarify: the background was -- are there pure altruists. Quite so, sorry for the slip. Any pure egoists? There wouldn't be any reason to ask this if it weren't for the pervasive effects of anti-egoism we have all experienced in our formative years, I think. A lot has to be undone to get there, but rational egoism (by , through, and for, one's self) is our natural state - entirely achievable, and essential. (For a pure egoist, look at a young child.) By, through, and for, others, conversely - is impossible and irrational. If altruism happened to be non-contradictory, and 'second nature' to Man, it wouldn't be viewed as 'moral' by conventional ethics - religious and liberals, alike. No, the 'morality' lies in its difficulty; its self-abnegation and unsustainability. However, the fallacy continues. The advocacy of altruism can do great harm to the psycho-epistemology of any who attempt it with sincerity and consistency. Most just fake it with mixed premises and evasions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avila Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 (For a pure egoist, look at a young child.) NOT a selling point for me!!! But I do understand what you're saying, even if your example is a bit, umm, scary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Avila asked if there are many, or any, pure egoists, against the background of are there pure Christians - and I think that is a highly significant question.The title of this thread asks: "Can an altruist be happy?" However, to someone who is actually trying to decide how to act, a better starting point is something like: if I make myself less selfish and more altruistic than what I am now, will I be happier? I think this is a more useful question. otherwise, the discussion tends to focus on "perfect" examples (either of altruism or pf egoism), and those are often less easy to consider as concretes. Tenderlysharp 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whYNOT Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 The title of this thread asks: "Can an altruist be happy?" However, to someone who is actually trying to decide how to act, a better starting point is something like: if I make myself less selfish and more altruistic than what I am now, will I be happier? I think this is a more useful question. otherwise, the discussion tends to focus on "perfect" examples (either of altruism or pf egoism), and those are often less easy to consider as concretes. I'm 100% behind the intent in this line of enquiry. I'd admit also that the 'perfect' egoist may not exist - he, or she is "a work in progress" - but that the 'perfect' altruist is doomed to fail totally in pursuit of a floating abstraction. I have strong reservations, though, concerning your suggested method - that of a person considering being "more altruistic". The 'method' rests (I think) on the supposition that egoism and altruism lie upon a continuum, and one can be increased, while the other, limited. The way I see it, this is one of those few cases of mutual exclusivity - once one has rejected every aspect of altruism, (in its broadest sense) there is little or nothing to be learned from it. However, your intention of attempting enhance one's happiness involving other people (in essense: - of what true value are others, objectively, and with regard to me, specifically?) is worthwhile and absolutely essential, imo. After rejecting duty and obligation to others, authority over his mind, living for their approval, etc., I believe the rational egoist has a responsibility to himself to establish his relation to other people. They are a large aspect of reality, after all. This leads in another direction away from the altruist morality towards respect, good will, voluntarism - also compassion, and tolerance. All granted benevolently to others, unless or until they are found to be unworthy of it. Self-evidently, this requires long introspection, trial and error, and concentrated focus on every other individual one meets. The kind of effort to find value in others that altruism dictates we should grant automatically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenderlysharp Posted August 28, 2011 Report Share Posted August 28, 2011 The idea of egoism brings to my mind a parallel with the open ended nature of knowledge. It is crucially important to grasp the fact that a concept is an "open ended" classification which includes the yet-to-be-discovered characteristics of a given group of existents. All of man's knowledge depends on that fact. -Ayn Rand, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology pg 66 What is the definition of a "pure" egoist? Someone living on a desert island perhaps? Would Ayn Rand define herself as an egoist or a pure egoist? This view implies the unadmitted presupposition that concepts are not a cognitive device of man's type of consciousness, but a repository of closed, out of context omniscience - and that concepts refer, not to the existents of the external world, but to the frozen, arrested state of knowledge inside any given consciousness at any given moment. On such a premise, every advance of knowledge is a setback, a demonstration of man's ignorance. -Ayn Rand, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology pg 67 Existence/Identity/Consciousness is a trinity. It is as inherent in man as it is in the way he gains knowledge. An egoist makes the best choice he can within the context of what he knows at the time he is making the choice. An egoist develops self confidence in his choices. When a man gives something to someone he loves he does it because he values the person. To say he can't be a pure egoist seems to mean that on some level he can't value his loved one enough to make the gift genuine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whYNOT Posted August 28, 2011 Report Share Posted August 28, 2011 The idea of egoism brings to my mind a parallel with the open ended nature of knowledge. [...] Existence/Identity/Consciousness is a trinity. It is as inherent in man as it is in the way he gains knowledge. Fully agreed. Not only a parallel, but in reality the same thing. Each of us is an open-ended 'arc of knowledge' - at varying stages of 'flight' - a combination of our present repository of knowledge with the potential certainty of future knowledge, I think. The entire concept of egoism is both derived from this, and simultaneously, is dependent on it. (As you have spotted.) "In the temple of his spirit each man is alone." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.