Formal Mormon Theology

[I Have Questions]

I guess you see it differently, but you’ve yet to explain why.

You just did it for me:

That determination and investment might lead to love. It might not from either your or their perspective.

I don’t think I did. Because a complete lack of determination and time investment will definitely not lead to love. Love does not happen in a vacuum of effort, which is the position you seem to be taking.

[Ego]

Y’all know I’m not talking about romantic love right? I’m talking about altruism. As in that random person in the coffee shop slips and falls and it looked very painful so you extend a hand to help them up and make sure they’re ok. I’m not really talking about, ‘they’re hot so you start flirting’. I certainly think that initial attraction can be something that causes saturated phenomena, which is why I would never rule out the possibility that even romantic love at first sight can also have genuine altruism and therefore isn’t necessarily wrong (though often it certainly is rushed and not done right).

[I Have Questions]

There is a school of thought that says there’s no such thing as altruism, in that people will always ultimately do what suits them best. The person in the coffee shop that helps you up isn’t doing something against what suits them best. Every act is, in a manner of speaking, selfish.

[huckelberry]

There is a school of thought that says there’s no such thing as altruism, in that people will always ultimately do what suits them best. The person in the coffee shop that helps you up isn’t doing something against what suits them best. Every act is, in a manner of speaking, selfish.

It has been proposed that it is good to love your neighbor as you love yourself. That sounds wiser than to reject yourself so that your love is more pure than your neighbors ordinary love.

Question, I think you have a point when considering some approaches to altruism which ask for elimination of concern for self .I actually do not remember many people with such over fastidious ideas of altruism. In fact I remember Ayn Rand using this as a target to criticize more than anybody chasing it as goal.

[I Have Questions]

There is a school of thought that says there’s no such thing as altruism, in that people will always ultimately do what suits them best. The person in the coffee shop that helps you up isn’t doing something against what suits them best. Every act is, in a manner of speaking, selfish.

It has been proposed that it is good to love your neighbor as you love yourself. That sounds wiser than to reject yourself so that your love is more pure than your neighbors ordinary love.

Question, I think you have a point when considering some approaches to altruism which ask for elimination of concern for self .I actually do not remember many people with such over fastidious ideas of altruism. In fact I remember Ayn Rand using this as a target to criticize more than anybody chasing it as goal.

The LDS Church and its leaders cannot be claimed as being altruistic. They aren’t. They put protection of themselves and their finances first. Above and beyond the needs of people. That’s why it isn’t Christ’s church. Because Christ, if he exists, would operate an institution that was truly altruistic, that placed it’s own wellbeing as secondary to the needs of the poor and downtrodden.

[Ego]

It has been proposed that it is good to love your neighbor as you love yourself. That sounds wiser than to reject yourself so that your love is more pure than your neighbors ordinary love.

Question, I think you have a point when considering some approaches to altruism which ask for elimination of concern for self .I actually do not remember many people with such over fastidious ideas of altruism. In fact I remember Ayn Rand using this as a target to criticize more than anybody chasing it as goal.

The LDS Church and its leaders cannot be claimed as being altruistic. They aren’t. They put protection of themselves and their finances first. Above and beyond the needs of people. That’s why it isn’t Christ’s church. Because Christ, if he exists, would operate an institution that was truly altruistic, that placed it’s own wellbeing as secondary to the needs of the poor and downtrodden.

I do what I can to fight the good fight. If my skills are in philosophy and theology then I do what I can to encourage a better way through them. Maybe someone will be interested in what I have to say, maybe they’ll be more encouraged to be altruistic, maybe needed reforms can take place. Maybe that’s all wishful thinking but at least I’ve tried.

[malkie]

There is a school of thought that says there’s no such thing as altruism, in that people will always ultimately do what suits them best. The person in the coffee shop that helps you up isn’t doing something against what suits them best. Every act is, in a manner of speaking, selfish.

I lean quite heavily in that direction - even gave a talk in church on the topic.

Perhaps it's a due to a personal "failing" that I see life, in general, as a series of cost/benefit analyses, whether conscious or not. A couple of people here know what I mean, and I'm willing to respond to (almost) anyone interested enough to PM me about it.

[huckelberry]

There is a school of thought that says there’s no such thing as altruism, in that people will always ultimately do what suits them best. The person in the coffee shop that helps you up isn’t doing something against what suits them best. Every act is, in a manner of speaking, selfish.

I lean quite heavily in that direction - even gave a talk in church on the topic.

Perhaps it's a due to a personal "failing" that I see life, in general, as a series of cost/benefit analyses, whether conscious or not. A couple of people here know what I mean, and I'm willing to respond to (almost) anyone interested enough to PM me about it.

the path that I find myself thinking along is that love is not so much forgetting oneself but opening oneself to understand and care about another. A connection to another changes oneself so that caring for another becomes a part of one's self concern. It is a changed concern not an alternate or alien concern. I can see the action as reflecting the value or self concern a person has but it is a changed concern when compared to the self concern a person has when disconnected from caring for another.

[Ego]

Just did a formal cross examination debate today with someone about the nature of God. I’ll write some takeaways from it tomorrow since it can contribute to the overall topic of Mormon Theology.

As for whether altruism exists or not; I think it does. I completely understand the view that everything we do whether conscious or not is self serving. I would lean towards the view that something can be both self serving and serve another, and that this can be considered altruistic whereas when something is self serving but harms another it is pride. Often that ‘self serving’ is just a brief moment of self satisfaction, but still if it benefits another and not just you, it’s altruism.

This meme critiques kind of how harsh and cynical and even contradictory it is to say that absolutely everything is self serving:
https://www.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyMemes/s/nvpGeid4mm

[malkie]

I lean quite heavily in that direction - even gave a talk in church on the topic.

Perhaps it's a due to a personal "failing" that I see life, in general, as a series of cost/benefit analyses, whether conscious or not. A couple of people here know what I mean, and I'm willing to respond to (almost) anyone interested enough to PM me about it.

the path that I find myself thinking along is that love is not so much forgetting oneself but opening oneself to understand and care about another. A connection to another changes oneself so that caring for another becomes a part of one's self concern. It is a changed concern not an alternate or alien concern. I can see the action as reflecting the value or self concern a person has but it is a changed concern when compared to the self concern a person has when disconnected from caring for another.

I can see that as being true. Thanks, huck.