justsaygnosis
18th June 2003, 04:34 PM
Much adieu is made about 'selflessness' and how it is a backbone element of 'good' religion.
Given that as a position its' diametric opposite should be acting strictly in one's own self interest seeking to obtain the maximum perceived benefit.
In a well socialized human being self interest need not be at variance with the society of that one's fellows. As an employee I have emphasized to the president and the general manager of the company I work at that I put forth the best effort I can give because it enables me to acheive the rewards of that effort.
Likewise that effort relieves my fellow workers from worrying about having to pick up my slack or cover for me. This gives me a place to go to work tomorrow and should I decide to change occupations allows me to use my current employ for referrence.
Socially if I remain in acceptable circumstances in society I enjoy the liberty associated with that standing.
This can be applied in sundried areas but the point is I don't feel pressured or coerced into behaving in a set fashion or standard that others have imposed on me. Still my intent is to be able to continue to act in pursuit of my own desires and aspirations without regard for the attention and kudos of others. It is essentially selfish but it is not the same as a sociopath who acts without regards to their impact on others.
With regard to 'saints', using the term generically, are they not acting in a manner that also facilitates their own sense of self expression and self worth? Is not their intent selfish by definition even though their efforts are directed toward an altruistic orient?
This differs enormously from control seekers and those who attempt to manipulate the insecurities of others in an attempt to avoid dealing with insecurities in them self.
Sorry for the length of post. It's about as concise as I can do.
Fire away if you wish.
Given that as a position its' diametric opposite should be acting strictly in one's own self interest seeking to obtain the maximum perceived benefit.
In a well socialized human being self interest need not be at variance with the society of that one's fellows. As an employee I have emphasized to the president and the general manager of the company I work at that I put forth the best effort I can give because it enables me to acheive the rewards of that effort.
Likewise that effort relieves my fellow workers from worrying about having to pick up my slack or cover for me. This gives me a place to go to work tomorrow and should I decide to change occupations allows me to use my current employ for referrence.
Socially if I remain in acceptable circumstances in society I enjoy the liberty associated with that standing.
This can be applied in sundried areas but the point is I don't feel pressured or coerced into behaving in a set fashion or standard that others have imposed on me. Still my intent is to be able to continue to act in pursuit of my own desires and aspirations without regard for the attention and kudos of others. It is essentially selfish but it is not the same as a sociopath who acts without regards to their impact on others.
With regard to 'saints', using the term generically, are they not acting in a manner that also facilitates their own sense of self expression and self worth? Is not their intent selfish by definition even though their efforts are directed toward an altruistic orient?
This differs enormously from control seekers and those who attempt to manipulate the insecurities of others in an attempt to avoid dealing with insecurities in them self.
Sorry for the length of post. It's about as concise as I can do.
Fire away if you wish.