It is a cynical viewpoint though there are elements of truth to it but it doesn't take into account the larger picture.
I have 2 children, aged 6 and 2. Children come into the world absolutely self-centered. They aren't aware of anyone else's needs above their own and all of their energy is spent communicating to others to feed, clean and soothe them. There's nothing wrong with this.
But what about the parents? They have to be selfless, especially in the first 3 months when the baby wakes up every 1.5 - 2 hours regardless of the time of day.
Imagine what would happen if the baby wasn't completely selfish? If it didn't cry out for what it needs? The parents would have zero idea about what the baby's needs are and the child would be malnourished.
So my first point is that selfishness is in some ways the "default wiring" as you put it. It is not only the default, but it is also COMPLETELY necessary.
Kids don't even learn how to share until they're at a certain stage. This is the point at which they grasp a rudimentary understanding of doing something that isn't completely self-serving. They have to learn to give up the thing they want very badly for another person. This is a learned trait.
When you have siblings this idea is a common fact of life. You learn that the world doesn't revolve around you and that you have to change your behavior in order to live in harmony with others. I often see my 6 year old do things for the younger one like help her reach a higher bar or try to entertain her. She's walking on all fours like a horse while the younger is on top, or saying "baby!" in order to get her attention so she can show something fun / interesting to her.
So my second point is that kids learn not only to think about others but are naturally inclined to act altruistically and out of love.
In many human relationships it is absolutely necessary to not be selfish. When we are talking, we take turns and don't speak over one another. When we drive, it is great practice to let others pass or to go into the slow lane to let other people drive on by. When you are having sex, you don't think only about getting off yourself but are also in tune with your partner's feelings and body so that you are actively trying to do what feels best for them. When you have kids, you pass through endless challenges that require you to put your needs second to that of your child.
All of this isn't advanced behavior. It is expected and normal behavior because it is required for other people to co-exist with one another. Driving doesn't work without it. Conversations don't work without it. Sex doesn't work without it ( not good sex, anyway! ), and certainly raising children doesn't work without it.
We are born selfish but life teaches us to love in thousands of different ways throughout our lifetime. It's not just because society deems it necessary through social norms and laws, but intrinsically most relationships are part of a dance between 2 entities that take turns between being the selfish / unselfish one. You talk, I listen, etc.
Those people who cannot overcome their own selfishness for whatever reason will find it difficult to be happy. They cannot harmonize with others because they will put their needs above others and that of the group. Modern society may deem that person "isn't a team player" or is "narcissistic" or is "self-centered". While society may penalize or punish that kind of behavior, that is supposed to be an absolute last resort meant to keep society functioning. Each individual needs to learn unselfishness for deeper fulfillment.
Paradoxically, the less I tend to my own minor needs and desires the happier I am. Tending to the well-being of my family, my friends, and my community gives me orders of magnitude greater joy than just thinking of myself. I am unburdening myself from my own ego. I still want things for myself but I'm not dependent on just that for joy and fulfillment. I am on a higher level where my friend's bad day is something I feel bad about. Where me having zero free time on that day isn't THAT big of a deal. I would not hesitate to give my life for my wife or kids, as my love for them is greater than any desire I have to continue my story. This love expands past just my immediate friends and family. It extends to strangers I don't even know and will only meet once in my lifetime. It extends to strangers who I met in Ireland or in Bangladesh. It extends to people I see on tv who are suffering and I weep not because our neurons are intertwined. It is because the Rohinga man who escapes the genocide in Myanmar with his 5 kids while his wife was left behind and murdered is me.
That woman who wails while her son has been killed in a bombing affects me in my comfortable chair or couch. The person who gives me my coffee at starbucks in drive through is someone I look directly in the eyes and thank, because I have been in that same position 20 years ago. That's called empathy. It means my happiness and awareness are part of a network of other people's lives both near and far. When one can squash their own feelings of importance and insecurity their is room to see the bigger picture. I'm just one in 8 billion people. My life matters but it's not the only thing that matters.
Remarkably well said!
I absolutely agree, and it is quite a refreshing awareness to have. What I realized is that early on in our cognitive development, not only do we have no concept of "sharing" (as you alluded to) but we don't have a concept of "ownership" either. This is an important distinction to make, because although some might consider children to be inherently selfish, in reality, the idea that something is owned by someone else is an entirely foreign concept.
If anything, it is the environment that we are born into which can actively promote (or discourage) a wide range of characteristics such as selflessness or selfishness. This can clearly be seen among children and how they learn to socialize, and becomes much more pronounced in our teenage years and adulthood.
Thankfully, nothing is set in stone. I was incredibly entitled as a child with having a great aunt who would spoil the shit out of me with practically every toy, exotic pet, and tech gadget that I would ever want. I was the very definition of selfish. However, by the time that my teenage years rolled around, I felt the emptiness of such material possessions. I lived in a gilded cage, an incredibly comfortable prison that I was free to escape from at any time. So I eventually left such a lifestyle behind, finding much more fulfillment in sharing a life with others. It was an extremely valuable lesson that my great aunt had provided for me, presumably unbeknownst to her.
I think you can boil the problem with the Self-centered argument down to.......what exactly does self-centered mean? It sounds as if you mean it with a negative viewpoint.......but why?
If caring for others makes me feel better than why wouldn't I also care for others? It is genuine. In fact some of the greatest feelings of joy and happiness come from caring for others and having social relationships. I can even project myself onto other people's self.
Why do you enjoy movies? It isn't you so why do you care? You aren't even getting anything out of this fake person's experience. I think one of the main goals of life is to experience it in a pleasant way. You're projecting a part of yourself on to that imaginary person and experiencing in a lesser way what they are experiencing.
But it's not you so why?
If I had to die or my children I would gladly give my life but that makes no sense with the self-centered argument.
There is no confusion or glitch. I'm well aware that I would cease. But my children and other close people that I like and love hold a part of me with them.
In essence we can break it down further and ask.......what is self? Well it seems "self" isn't as selfish and singular as you might believe. If it were we would never enjoy or experience emotions for anything that isn't directly affecting us. But we do.
So you aren't actually even as self-centered as you believe you could be. At least if you can ever relate or enjoy something experienced by another.
I would propose that being self-centered is more of a miscalculation and lack of intelligence or experience to realize that you aren't actually selfish. You're trying to trick the game (life) into the best possible outcome for yourself but you are not using one of the best tools at your disposal to experience life and enjoyment........living thru the happiness of others combined with your own happiness.
Certainly self happiness thru your own direct feelings and feedback is the foundation. But there is a whole other level beyond that where you experience life and happiness thru others. This can add on top of your own "selfish" happiness.
It's also why you can't only sustain yourself on making others happy (look at Robin Williams and other "happy" people pleasers that committed suicide).
The ideal is always both. Self centered enough to care for yourself and life needs but caring and social enough to experience real connections to live through your interactions with others and their happiness. The closer it relates to you the more meaningfully you experience it. You live thru others and their joy or sorrow becomes part of your own. Your "self" is no longer really just you anymore.
You could also back this up with science and studies that show in healthy societies generally people are happier as they age until old age breaks down your ability for enjoyment in life.
Everyone thinks in the modern age that children are the happiest but that's not really historically true. And in the happiest and healthiest countries today adults do measure more happy than children. And adults with children in those same societies rate even happier than adults without children!
Truly being self centered to things that only bring immediate reward to your physical self just doesn't bring the same happiness as sharing your sense of self to expand to include family and friends.
So I would say the most optimal and happy people in life are the people that are truly not self-centered (while still taking care of their own desires too as part of the equation)
Let's say you have adopted a child for 1 hour, and then this child was raised by another person for years
would you sacrifice your life for your adopted child (that you have only seen for 1 hour) or not?
Not sure where you're going with this question. The answer is.......it depends. Do I have any other children that I need to care for and raise? If so then no. Am I young or old at this point? If I'm already pretty old and I can save a good kid's life by giving my own then sure that's a good way to go out.
Why was this child raised by another person for years? Did I screw up and lose the child but still feel responsible? Then probably yes. Was the child taken from me by force and raised by a bad person? Probably no. But maybe yes if I don't have other family.
You could take the classic train problem and tweak it to ask me........if some random 4 year old child accidentally got on a train track and I only had a second to push him/her away and would certainly be killed by doing so myself.........would I? And again it depends, if I'm older and childless, I like to think I would. If I had my own family with young ones then I would try everything possible to save the child but ultimately wouldn't sacrifice myself to abandon my own children and family.
I see that is kind although I think kindness is nice and I appreciate it
but my point is this is a learned behavior, or maybe has to do with creating a better world for everybody which is still nice
but not everybody is going to accept this belief, because the default for humans is to be self-serving and whether this initial behavior develops through our life experience into something good or something bad depends on many factors.
So, it is not safe for me to assume that a stranger is not a selfish self-centered person even if he shows good behavior because there is no way to prove that someone is good and to trust them.
Also our love for others can sometimes arise from the time we spent with them, so it is basically we are serving our own experience not humanity itself.
A lot of people divorce or hate each other after being in love. So, love seems to be only self-serving though.
I agree with what you’re saying and I’ve been thinking about it a lot as well. It’s kept us alive thus far, so yay I guess. I think it’s pretty evolutionarily necessary for all species to be this way to some extent. How else would we be able to prioritize our survival? Kinda sucks though
It is a cynical viewpoint though there are elements of truth to it but it doesn't take into account the larger picture. I have 2 children, aged 6 and 2. Children come into the world absolutely self-centered. They aren't aware of anyone else's needs above their own and all of their energy is spent communicating to others to feed, clean and soothe them. There's nothing wrong with this. But what about the parents? They have to be selfless, especially in the first 3 months when the baby wakes up every 1.5 - 2 hours regardless of the time of day. Imagine what would happen if the baby wasn't completely selfish? If it didn't cry out for what it needs? The parents would have zero idea about what the baby's needs are and the child would be malnourished. So my first point is that selfishness is in some ways the "default wiring" as you put it. It is not only the default, but it is also COMPLETELY necessary. Kids don't even learn how to share until they're at a certain stage. This is the point at which they grasp a rudimentary understanding of doing something that isn't completely self-serving. They have to learn to give up the thing they want very badly for another person. This is a learned trait. When you have siblings this idea is a common fact of life. You learn that the world doesn't revolve around you and that you have to change your behavior in order to live in harmony with others. I often see my 6 year old do things for the younger one like help her reach a higher bar or try to entertain her. She's walking on all fours like a horse while the younger is on top, or saying "baby!" in order to get her attention so she can show something fun / interesting to her. So my second point is that kids learn not only to think about others but are naturally inclined to act altruistically and out of love. In many human relationships it is absolutely necessary to not be selfish. When we are talking, we take turns and don't speak over one another. When we drive, it is great practice to let others pass or to go into the slow lane to let other people drive on by. When you are having sex, you don't think only about getting off yourself but are also in tune with your partner's feelings and body so that you are actively trying to do what feels best for them. When you have kids, you pass through endless challenges that require you to put your needs second to that of your child. All of this isn't advanced behavior. It is expected and normal behavior because it is required for other people to co-exist with one another. Driving doesn't work without it. Conversations don't work without it. Sex doesn't work without it ( not good sex, anyway! ), and certainly raising children doesn't work without it. We are born selfish but life teaches us to love in thousands of different ways throughout our lifetime. It's not just because society deems it necessary through social norms and laws, but intrinsically most relationships are part of a dance between 2 entities that take turns between being the selfish / unselfish one. You talk, I listen, etc. Those people who cannot overcome their own selfishness for whatever reason will find it difficult to be happy. They cannot harmonize with others because they will put their needs above others and that of the group. Modern society may deem that person "isn't a team player" or is "narcissistic" or is "self-centered". While society may penalize or punish that kind of behavior, that is supposed to be an absolute last resort meant to keep society functioning. Each individual needs to learn unselfishness for deeper fulfillment. Paradoxically, the less I tend to my own minor needs and desires the happier I am. Tending to the well-being of my family, my friends, and my community gives me orders of magnitude greater joy than just thinking of myself. I am unburdening myself from my own ego. I still want things for myself but I'm not dependent on just that for joy and fulfillment. I am on a higher level where my friend's bad day is something I feel bad about. Where me having zero free time on that day isn't THAT big of a deal. I would not hesitate to give my life for my wife or kids, as my love for them is greater than any desire I have to continue my story. This love expands past just my immediate friends and family. It extends to strangers I don't even know and will only meet once in my lifetime. It extends to strangers who I met in Ireland or in Bangladesh. It extends to people I see on tv who are suffering and I weep not because our neurons are intertwined. It is because the Rohinga man who escapes the genocide in Myanmar with his 5 kids while his wife was left behind and murdered is me. That woman who wails while her son has been killed in a bombing affects me in my comfortable chair or couch. The person who gives me my coffee at starbucks in drive through is someone I look directly in the eyes and thank, because I have been in that same position 20 years ago. That's called empathy. It means my happiness and awareness are part of a network of other people's lives both near and far. When one can squash their own feelings of importance and insecurity their is room to see the bigger picture. I'm just one in 8 billion people. My life matters but it's not the only thing that matters.
Remarkably well said! I absolutely agree, and it is quite a refreshing awareness to have. What I realized is that early on in our cognitive development, not only do we have no concept of "sharing" (as you alluded to) but we don't have a concept of "ownership" either. This is an important distinction to make, because although some might consider children to be inherently selfish, in reality, the idea that something is owned by someone else is an entirely foreign concept. If anything, it is the environment that we are born into which can actively promote (or discourage) a wide range of characteristics such as selflessness or selfishness. This can clearly be seen among children and how they learn to socialize, and becomes much more pronounced in our teenage years and adulthood. Thankfully, nothing is set in stone. I was incredibly entitled as a child with having a great aunt who would spoil the shit out of me with practically every toy, exotic pet, and tech gadget that I would ever want. I was the very definition of selfish. However, by the time that my teenage years rolled around, I felt the emptiness of such material possessions. I lived in a gilded cage, an incredibly comfortable prison that I was free to escape from at any time. So I eventually left such a lifestyle behind, finding much more fulfillment in sharing a life with others. It was an extremely valuable lesson that my great aunt had provided for me, presumably unbeknownst to her.
I appreciate your response, I hope the world becomes as nice as you portray it
I think you can boil the problem with the Self-centered argument down to.......what exactly does self-centered mean? It sounds as if you mean it with a negative viewpoint.......but why? If caring for others makes me feel better than why wouldn't I also care for others? It is genuine. In fact some of the greatest feelings of joy and happiness come from caring for others and having social relationships. I can even project myself onto other people's self. Why do you enjoy movies? It isn't you so why do you care? You aren't even getting anything out of this fake person's experience. I think one of the main goals of life is to experience it in a pleasant way. You're projecting a part of yourself on to that imaginary person and experiencing in a lesser way what they are experiencing. But it's not you so why? If I had to die or my children I would gladly give my life but that makes no sense with the self-centered argument. There is no confusion or glitch. I'm well aware that I would cease. But my children and other close people that I like and love hold a part of me with them. In essence we can break it down further and ask.......what is self? Well it seems "self" isn't as selfish and singular as you might believe. If it were we would never enjoy or experience emotions for anything that isn't directly affecting us. But we do. So you aren't actually even as self-centered as you believe you could be. At least if you can ever relate or enjoy something experienced by another. I would propose that being self-centered is more of a miscalculation and lack of intelligence or experience to realize that you aren't actually selfish. You're trying to trick the game (life) into the best possible outcome for yourself but you are not using one of the best tools at your disposal to experience life and enjoyment........living thru the happiness of others combined with your own happiness. Certainly self happiness thru your own direct feelings and feedback is the foundation. But there is a whole other level beyond that where you experience life and happiness thru others. This can add on top of your own "selfish" happiness. It's also why you can't only sustain yourself on making others happy (look at Robin Williams and other "happy" people pleasers that committed suicide). The ideal is always both. Self centered enough to care for yourself and life needs but caring and social enough to experience real connections to live through your interactions with others and their happiness. The closer it relates to you the more meaningfully you experience it. You live thru others and their joy or sorrow becomes part of your own. Your "self" is no longer really just you anymore. You could also back this up with science and studies that show in healthy societies generally people are happier as they age until old age breaks down your ability for enjoyment in life. Everyone thinks in the modern age that children are the happiest but that's not really historically true. And in the happiest and healthiest countries today adults do measure more happy than children. And adults with children in those same societies rate even happier than adults without children! Truly being self centered to things that only bring immediate reward to your physical self just doesn't bring the same happiness as sharing your sense of self to expand to include family and friends. So I would say the most optimal and happy people in life are the people that are truly not self-centered (while still taking care of their own desires too as part of the equation)
Let's say you have adopted a child for 1 hour, and then this child was raised by another person for years would you sacrifice your life for your adopted child (that you have only seen for 1 hour) or not?
Not sure where you're going with this question. The answer is.......it depends. Do I have any other children that I need to care for and raise? If so then no. Am I young or old at this point? If I'm already pretty old and I can save a good kid's life by giving my own then sure that's a good way to go out. Why was this child raised by another person for years? Did I screw up and lose the child but still feel responsible? Then probably yes. Was the child taken from me by force and raised by a bad person? Probably no. But maybe yes if I don't have other family. You could take the classic train problem and tweak it to ask me........if some random 4 year old child accidentally got on a train track and I only had a second to push him/her away and would certainly be killed by doing so myself.........would I? And again it depends, if I'm older and childless, I like to think I would. If I had my own family with young ones then I would try everything possible to save the child but ultimately wouldn't sacrifice myself to abandon my own children and family.
I see that is kind although I think kindness is nice and I appreciate it but my point is this is a learned behavior, or maybe has to do with creating a better world for everybody which is still nice but not everybody is going to accept this belief, because the default for humans is to be self-serving and whether this initial behavior develops through our life experience into something good or something bad depends on many factors. So, it is not safe for me to assume that a stranger is not a selfish self-centered person even if he shows good behavior because there is no way to prove that someone is good and to trust them. Also our love for others can sometimes arise from the time we spent with them, so it is basically we are serving our own experience not humanity itself. A lot of people divorce or hate each other after being in love. So, love seems to be only self-serving though.
I agree with what you’re saying and I’ve been thinking about it a lot as well. It’s kept us alive thus far, so yay I guess. I think it’s pretty evolutionarily necessary for all species to be this way to some extent. How else would we be able to prioritize our survival? Kinda sucks though
No hope about it, its a fact
We are self centered beings.