I think that the question will eventually come down to 'are we naturally selfish or naturally selfless' ? (recognising of course that there can be a spectrum in between).
Selfish.
If we are naturally selfish then ultimately everyone else is a competitor and their gain is potentially our loss and vice versa.
I think that's incorrect. And it's especially not true for the human species. In a social species like ours, people gain more by working together more than they gain by tearing each other apart. In that respect, it is selfish (more gain for me) to work together.
When put in these stark terms it sounds quite horrible (to me anyway) but depending on our belief system, selfishness could be an individuals logical conclusion as the best way to behave.
In the terms I used, I think it is. And I don't see it as horrible at all. It's great that we work together. Cooperation is people being selfish... together.
If we are naturally selfless, OTOH, then ultimately we are all inter-dependent, if others are unhappy or suffering then my own happiness is less at least to some extent.
To me, selfless means that you care only about the well being of others... but keep in mind; there is another side to that. Selfless also means you don't care about your own personal suffering. The problem with that is obvious. If you are always concerned about the well-being of others, and not of yourself, then you would never accept the generosity of the others around you, and you, yourself, wouldn't care that
you were suffering. It would be detrimental to the individual to be completely selfless. And since we're all individuals, the species would suffer.
Evolution was able to get us to the point where working together is a selfish act. And it is. If it were more environmentally fit to be completely selfless, we probably would be. But that's not how things play out.
This strikes me as being closer to an accurate overall picture of the reality of human society. But I recognise that this is simply my own current belief.
Given what I've just said, do you still think so? Can you provide an example of someone being completely selfless? There was an episode of
Friends a few years ago, where Phoebe challenged Joey to do something completely selfless. He couldn't do it. Can you?
What I seem to have left out so far is feelings. Much of the above belief and behaviour is often dependent on our feelings. Eg a feeling of pleasure when I win a race (ie appear better than others in some way), or a feeling of sadness when I see starving children (witness the suffering of others).
Feelings and emotions lead most religious people around by the nose. Most of the reasoning behind this is that the decision making processes inside our brain take place in the same spots as our emotions. The neocortex isn't intertwined with our decision making. I think it takes practice to weed through emotions in search of what's really going on.
It could easily be argued that we are generally both naturally selfish and naturally selfless to varying degrees. We have also all heard stories about people who seem to be very far to one end of the spectrum ie very cruel or very kind to other people.
Maybe. But again, can you give me an example of a completely selfless act? Something where the individual does something for no personal gain, satisfaction, reward, or to make themselves feel good about what they've done. Giving to the poor feels good. Donating blood feels good. Even something like jumping on a grenade to save your buddies can be seen as a selfish act, because they are rewarded with saving the lives of your friends, and it feels good to help your friends. And even if you want to call that act 'selfless', look what the net result is? The death of the individual. How long would our species last if everyone did that sort of thing?
However, what I'd like to suggest brings this all back to the last point which I put on my list 'we discover what works'. I think that there is a strong inter-relationship between our feelings and our emotions, our beliefs, and our behaviour.
We didn't discover what works. Evolution gave us what works best, because being the way we are made our species most fit to survive. And I agree with your second statement.
'Discovering what works' relates to our feelings feeding in to our beliefs.
But our feelings can lie to us. What we need to do is discover how to balance what our feelings tell us, with what's logically, and rationally going to get us to the best end result.
Our feelings will generally tell us if our current beliefs and if society's current (general) beliefs are working or not.
Yes, but we can't just rely on our feelings to make the decisions for us, because life and society is a bit more complex than that. Take, for example, the issue of pre-existing conditions and mandating health care. Now, the whole notion of pre-existing conditions makes us feel bad. Nobody feels good about insurance companies telling people they can't have insurance because they have a bad condition. And nobody also wants to be told that they have to buy health care. Those are emotional reactions. But you have to THINK it through before realizing how important the mandate is. If you don't mandate health care, you can never get rid of pre-existing conditions, because nobody is going to purchase health care until they get sick. And that will eliminate the idea that people are paying into the system all the time, and thus, how would running a health care company be profitable at all? It wouldn't.
So we can't just be led around by the nose. It's critical to think things through.
By 'working' I mean leading to good outcomes both for individuals and for society as a whole.
Yes. And in the above example, mandating health care is 'less bad' than telling someone they can't have insurance.
I suggest that if the majority of individuals are selfish then a society will fail and if the majority of individuals are unselfish (selfless) then a society will flourish.
I don't think you're thinking this through. Think further into it. What does it mean to be selfish in a social species like humans? It's different than what you're making it out to be. Selfishness means that the individual will naturally try to find the best way to get what they themselves need. In a social species, working together is better at that than working apart. So what you see is groups of selfish people working together toward the same end. Selflessness is working only for the benefit of others. It would be a detriment to the individual to do so.
I believe that laws can be an attempt to guide behaviour modification for the better over time, however laws can also (unfortunately) be used by the selfish to gain control over others.
Religion may also be used by the selfish to gain control over others.
And now, to throw the cat among the pigeons, I'll bring God back in to the discussion : - ). God is the essence of selflessness (I am not talking about Bible-god which is often men's clumsy attempts to describe and personify something they don't understand). At the heart of most major religions is unity with God through the recognition of selflessness. Thus for example 'all is one' in various Eastern beliefs and 'denial of the self' in Christianity.
The whole thing works fine without the notion of God. It's superfluous to put it in.
