Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, and darkness resides in Pluto
- Thread starter Kaze Araki
- Start date
Well, it would be an overgeneralization to claim that all men-women relationships are selfless and sincere (or the opposite). There's a spectrum of the relationships. Some may be really selfish and insincere, but others may be really selfless and sincere. Then again. by simplifying the nature of each person's actions it is possible to dichotomize all relationships into being either selfish and insincere or selfless and sincere, so IMO it goes on a case-by-case basis.
The instinct drove us to search for companionship, therefore ultimately it is driven by our individual needs - thus the selfishness.
To make my point even further, in finding our consort - we always create a set of criteria that satisfy our desire - so once again, where is the sincerity and selflessness?
To make my point even further, in finding our consort - we always create a set of criteria that satisfy our desire - so once again, where is the sincerity and selflessness?
Ideally, relationship is a compromise between two selfish desires.
Sincerity in a relationship is a myth, it does not exist in reality.
But sometimes, one can become stubborn and wish not for a compromise, this can result in:
A. Possessive attitude where one force the consort to satisfy one desires.
B. Sacrificial attitude where one's objective is to fulfill the consort desires.
Both obsessions ultimately can be traced back to the gratification of one's inner desires.
What that may seems to be selfless attitudes on the outside is nothing more but a fulfillment of selfish needs on the inside.
Sincerity in a relationship is a myth, it does not exist in reality.
But sometimes, one can become stubborn and wish not for a compromise, this can result in:
A. Possessive attitude where one force the consort to satisfy one desires.
B. Sacrificial attitude where one's objective is to fulfill the consort desires.
Both obsessions ultimately can be traced back to the gratification of one's inner desires.
What that may seems to be selfless attitudes on the outside is nothing more but a fulfillment of selfish needs on the inside.
I'm sorry what was the question?
If you assume the desire/need comes from instinct then you are working off the theory that emotions are the evolutionary lovechild of instinct and communication. Which means sincerity and selfishness can mean anything as long as you word it correctly.
Which of the following is true:
All acts are selfish.
All words are sincere.
Both are true.
Both are false.
All of the above is a lie.
Since all acts are inherently selfish EVEN IF THE SELFLESSNESS OUTWEIGHS THE SELFISHNESS its still in some way shape or form selfish.
If not all words are insincere, then no words are insincere, and nothing can be taken at face value therefore: if you are insincere once, you can never be sincere again. You can be honest and tell the truth but you cant be "sincere".
but its all a lie anyway Romantic love as you know it now hasnt existed for more then 100 years. Therefore the question whether or not a stable relationship can be predicated upon romantic love is a moot point.
If you assume the desire/need comes from instinct then you are working off the theory that emotions are the evolutionary lovechild of instinct and communication. Which means sincerity and selfishness can mean anything as long as you word it correctly.
Which of the following is true:
All acts are selfish.
All words are sincere.
Both are true.
Both are false.
All of the above is a lie.
Since all acts are inherently selfish EVEN IF THE SELFLESSNESS OUTWEIGHS THE SELFISHNESS its still in some way shape or form selfish.
If not all words are insincere, then no words are insincere, and nothing can be taken at face value therefore: if you are insincere once, you can never be sincere again. You can be honest and tell the truth but you cant be "sincere".
but its all a lie anyway Romantic love as you know it now hasnt existed for more then 100 years. Therefore the question whether or not a stable relationship can be predicated upon romantic love is a moot point.
It exists, just not in most couples.
Incorrect. Marriage is a construct of a civilized society. Marriage as an institution does not exist on a genetic level. Basically our animal instincts do not drive us to marry because love/romanticism does not exist within a state of nature. Speaking from an animalistic standpoint, our only drive is to mate which we could easily do by raping. Marriage implies rules, restrictions, and the like, before one is able to pass on their genes. Marriage as an institution is counter-productive to the animalistic approach to mating. Therefore marriage, as an institution is not driven by animal instinct.
He's been doing that A LOT lately.
That's a sad way to look at things. Not everything is driven by selfishness just because you think it is. One of our individual needs is to breathe. Does breathing make us selfish? One of our individual needs is to eat. Does the act of eating, on its own, imply that we're selfish? And please, do not attempt to amuse me by going on a tangent about stealing food, pillaging, or what have you. Does eating, as a stand alone act imply selfishness? No of course not. Preservation of the self, of the race does often come at a cost to others, but the act of self-preservation by itself is nothing selfish.
I don't even have enough time to explain everything that is wrong with this statement so I will summarize.
1) You're overgeneralizing, again.
2) Some men look for women with big boobs, most women look for men with money. Why? A woman with big boobs is suited for nursing just as a man with money is suited to providing for his family. The respective sex looks for qualities in their opposite which would contribute to the survival of their next genetic line. Given how much you advocate nature, genetics, and evolution I wouldn't think I have to explain this.
3) Another issue with your argument is that you do not take into account those marriages in which one or neither party is getting married to satisfy his or her desire. I'm referring to arranged marriages in which it is not uncommon for couples to marry for no other reason than being forced into it by their families.
Incorrect. Marriage is a construct of a civilized society. Marriage as an institution does not exist on a genetic level. Basically our animal instincts do not drive us to marry because love/romanticism does not exist within a state of nature. Speaking from an animalistic standpoint, our only drive is to mate which we could easily do by raping. Marriage implies rules, restrictions, and the like, before one is able to pass on their genes. Marriage as an institution is counter-productive to the animalistic approach to mating. Therefore marriage, as an institution is not driven by animal instinct.
He's been doing that A LOT lately.
That's a sad way to look at things. Not everything is driven by selfishness just because you think it is. One of our individual needs is to breathe. Does breathing make us selfish? One of our individual needs is to eat. Does the act of eating, on its own, imply that we're selfish? And please, do not attempt to amuse me by going on a tangent about stealing food, pillaging, or what have you. Does eating, as a stand alone act imply selfishness? No of course not. Preservation of the self, of the race does often come at a cost to others, but the act of self-preservation by itself is nothing selfish.
I don't even have enough time to explain everything that is wrong with this statement so I will summarize.
1) You're overgeneralizing, again.
2) Some men look for women with big boobs, most women look for men with money. Why? A woman with big boobs is suited for nursing just as a man with money is suited to providing for his family. The respective sex looks for qualities in their opposite which would contribute to the survival of their next genetic line. Given how much you advocate nature, genetics, and evolution I wouldn't think I have to explain this.
3) Another issue with your argument is that you do not take into account those marriages in which one or neither party is getting married to satisfy his or her desire. I'm referring to arranged marriages in which it is not uncommon for couples to marry for no other reason than being forced into it by their families.
Why would that be selfish? Youre lonely, the other is lonely, you meet, get to know each other, like each other, and have fun when youre together with them. Sure, youre having fun, but so has the other. Why is it selfish if both benefit from each others presence.
Besides, it also means that if you like each other enough, you end up supporting each other as well. Meaning youre not having fun, but you help the other with that. Because you genuinely dont like it when the other is hurt and because you want to help that person feel better. That happens as well in a good relationship. I wouldnt call that selfish.
No you create a set of criteria before you can love in the first place. Sure, I could date someone I find unattractive, boring and stupid, but I would never love someone like that, let alone that it would ever result in a successful relationship. Being selfless doesnt mean you should go for the first person you meet and be miserable the rest of your life.
Besides, selflessness also doesnt mean you cant have desires. It just means that you are prepared to let them go for the other. Of course, the other has to be prepared to let his/her desires go as well. So you get either a compromise or a give and take situation.
Besides, it also means that if you like each other enough, you end up supporting each other as well. Meaning youre not having fun, but you help the other with that. Because you genuinely dont like it when the other is hurt and because you want to help that person feel better. That happens as well in a good relationship. I wouldnt call that selfish.
No you create a set of criteria before you can love in the first place. Sure, I could date someone I find unattractive, boring and stupid, but I would never love someone like that, let alone that it would ever result in a successful relationship. Being selfless doesnt mean you should go for the first person you meet and be miserable the rest of your life.
Besides, selflessness also doesnt mean you cant have desires. It just means that you are prepared to let them go for the other. Of course, the other has to be prepared to let his/her desires go as well. So you get either a compromise or a give and take situation.
for all those that missed it and attacked kaze without understanding what he meant
You might be one of the people that goes to the school of: if the selflessness outweighs the selfishness its selfless!
But then you are just lying to yourself. The only way an act can be truly selfless if the person committing the act is completely unbiased by emotions, involvement and investment.
Since almost all humans have emotions, no act is selfless.
Yes, for it concern exclusively for our own well being.
Yes, and for the very same exact reason as above.
No idea what you're talking about.
Unfortunately, yes it is.
"At a cost to others" is by the very definition; selfish.
Fundamentally, my point is this:
We develop our emotion since birth, in fact the first thing that we do when we enter this world is to cry, which is an act driven by our instinctive subconscious needs to be relieved of our discomfort (whatever it may be). This act concern only for our own satisfaction, and starting from that very same day until the day we die - every single thing we do in our life is to gratify this satisfaction without concern of others. This is by the very definition: selfishness.
When you decide to help an old lady cross the street, it is an act of empathy, but ultimately, this emphatic feeling derive itself once again from our subconscious needs to satisfy our own desire, which in this case being empathic.
Yes, and for the very same exact reason as above.
No idea what you're talking about.
Unfortunately, yes it is.
"At a cost to others" is by the very definition; selfish.
Fundamentally, my point is this:
We develop our emotion since birth, in fact the first thing that we do when we enter this world is to cry, which is an act driven by our instinctive subconscious needs to be relieved of our discomfort (whatever it may be). This act concern only for our own satisfaction, and starting from that very same day until the day we die - every single thing we do in our life is to gratify this satisfaction without concern of others. This is by the very definition: selfishness.
When you decide to help an old lady cross the street, it is an act of empathy, but ultimately, this emphatic feeling derive itself once again from our subconscious needs to satisfy our own desire, which in this case being empathic.
Dont babies cry when they are born to test out their lungs. How is that selfish?
Oh, and going for your own satisfaction doesnt have to be selfish. Its only selfish when you put your needs over that of others. And even then I feel it needs to be done by someone who has enough cognitive abilities to know that he puts his needs over that of others. After all, how can you put your needs over that of others if you dont know youre actually doing that.
And again all the subconscious stuff. You seem to know an awful lot about other peoples secret motives that are essentially hidden from anyone, including the owners of these motives. Really, this is just blaming people to be all selfish afterwards without proof. Youre just making assumptions about the subconscious, its power to influence behavior, etc. Furthermore, how is helping old ladies selfish if you dont even know youre not actually helping the old lady but are actually working in the interest of your own desires. Hell, how exactly do you put your needs over that of others in the case of helping an old lady? After all, you are satisfying the old ladies need for help as well dont you? Its a win win situation. How are those selfish?
Oh, and going for your own satisfaction doesnt have to be selfish. Its only selfish when you put your needs over that of others. And even then I feel it needs to be done by someone who has enough cognitive abilities to know that he puts his needs over that of others. After all, how can you put your needs over that of others if you dont know youre actually doing that.
And again all the subconscious stuff. You seem to know an awful lot about other peoples secret motives that are essentially hidden from anyone, including the owners of these motives. Really, this is just blaming people to be all selfish afterwards without proof. Youre just making assumptions about the subconscious, its power to influence behavior, etc. Furthermore, how is helping old ladies selfish if you dont even know youre not actually helping the old lady but are actually working in the interest of your own desires. Hell, how exactly do you put your needs over that of others in the case of helping an old lady? After all, you are satisfying the old ladies need for help as well dont you? Its a win win situation. How are those selfish?
Because its also a win situation for you.
And @ the baby reference. It coughs to breathe... oxygen that could have saved a dying man in the future. Even better its instinct tells it to breathe or its body wont survive. No conscious decision to breathe is made here.
Breathing is an extremely selfish act. Since we need to breathe to survive you are inherently selfish.
The definition of selfish clearly states you have to put your needs over that of another. If by breathing someone else chokes, breathing becomes selfish. But as long your breathing doesnt cause harm to other people, its a neutral act. And since breathing doesnt cause other people to choke, breathing babies are not selfish.
Also, its simply ridiculous that according to you and Kaze, selfless means you HAVE to suffer from it, and you arent even allowed to feel good about it afterwards. Thats just a ridiculous and simply not true. According to the dictionary it means youre unconcerned about yourself. That doesnt mean that afterwards you cant feel good about yourself.
Also, its simply ridiculous that according to you and Kaze, selfless means you HAVE to suffer from it, and you arent even allowed to feel good about it afterwards. Thats just a ridiculous and simply not true. According to the dictionary it means youre unconcerned about yourself. That doesnt mean that afterwards you cant feel good about yourself.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/selfishness?show=0&t=1315489730
Professor Lexus, I can't seems to find any mention of "cause harm to other people" as a characteristic.
Professor Lexus, I can't seems to find any mention of "cause harm to other people" as a characteristic.
Alright, to clarify, I didnt mean to say that selfishness means you gotta cause harm to others. But in the case of breathing, it will have too as thats the only way breathing forces you to make a choice. Either I breath and live and someone else chokes, meaning I put myself before anyone else, or I hold my breath, choke and let someone else live but I end up being selfless. Otherwise, breathing is not a selfish act, simply because youre not putting yourself, or your interests over the interests of others. If I breath, Im not depriving someone else from oxygen, if I breath, I do not choose myself over someone else. In other words, breathing isnt selfish.
Geez, was it that hard to understand?
Geez, was it that hard to understand?