1 2 3
Dude, just jump already.
10/23/2011 4:49:35 AM
"Theres no good in just sacrificing yourself."
You mean like what Jesus did for your sins?
10/23/2011 4:49:36 AM
This guy must be doing word redefinitions for Conservapedia.
10/23/2011 5:31:40 AM
No really that is just some mixed up stuff right there.
10/23/2011 5:40:28 AM
10/23/2011 5:54:44 AM
I can't understand this word salad at all and I'm fairly certain you didn't understand it either when you were vomiting it onto the Internet.
10/23/2011 6:23:31 AM
Seems we have ourselves a Randroid.
10/23/2011 6:26:18 AM
Will you make up your damn mind?
10/23/2011 6:28:07 AM
Percy Q. Shunn
10/23/2011 6:42:15 AM
"Altruism is more animal behavior. When a human "sacrifices" out of love it is not a sacrifice at all, so it is not altruism. True love is selfish and when it is selfish it is also loving. If a man jumps in front of a car for his child yes that is very selfish behavior not altruistic at all."
You seem ... confused.
"Altruism is when you sacrifice yourself for basically no good at all."
Be altruistic. Kill yourself.
Is that what you're getting at?
"Theres no good in just sacrificing yourself."
Yup. Still confused.
10/23/2011 6:56:02 AM
Another fundie going pretty much directly against the teachings of Jesus.
10/23/2011 7:16:52 AM
So then stop trying to make me feel guilty for rejecting Jesus after he supposedly died for my sins.
10/23/2011 8:00:04 AM
He's not really wrong. He's not eloquent about it but this is actually a fairly common philosophical argument. Is it really altruistic to make a sacrifice if you get something out of it? You jump in front of a car to save your child and you are ensuring the continuation of your genetics. Plus, it's possible you couldn't have lived with yourself had your child died, so you are sacrificing your life partially as to not deal with the pain of not saving the kid.
If I give to charity, I will feel good about it and other people will think better of me. If I'm Bill Gates and have so much money that money ceases to even matter, giving enormous amounts of it to charity isn't altruism because I gain more happiness out of people saying good things about me than I do out of the increasingly diminished returns of my money. Even if I'm not rich and give to charity, it means that I value the happiness i gain from charitable giving more than the happiness I get from the money i give away.
As for the Jesus thing, dying for their sins and then getting to serve as the right hand of God kind of proves the point, doesn't it? If you told me I had to suffer for a few days and in return I'd become a living God, I'd sign up in a second and that doesn't make me altruistic. Not fundy, not an uncommon argument, the "there's no good in just sacrificing yourself" is actually common sense. Terrible quote.
10/23/2011 8:11:07 AM
That's the point of Altruism, you meatball! There no sense in a meaningless sacrifice! Stupid, word-salad, Medician, Randian, dingleberry!
10/23/2011 8:52:57 AM
Tell me, how do you feel like being a selfish dick?
10/23/2011 9:18:23 AM
Possibly he's tried to read one of the recent books on moral behavior in other species. Tried, and failed.
10/23/2011 9:32:15 AM
10/23/2011 9:39:49 AM
"When a human "sacrifices" out of love it is not a sacrifice at all, so it is not altruism. True love is selfish and when it is selfish it is also loving. If a man jumps in front of a car for his child yes that is very selfish behavior not altruistic at all. Altruism is when you sacrifice yourself for basically no good at all. Theres no good in just sacrificing yourself."
(*Loads clip with .50 cal. Remington Black Talon rounds; slides clip into Desert Eagle. Pulls back slide and chambers round. Hands gun to Brisingamen; leaves room, locks door
10/23/2011 9:44:52 AM
His argument is that it's not truly a sacrifice if you're giving it up for something you care about. If you love your child and sacrifice yourself for them, it's a selfish act because you value the child more than your own life and are acting on your moral instincts.
Selfishness, in this case, is not seen as an unethical thing.
It's an idea Ayn Rand espoused a while back when she talked about the ethics of greed; the idea was that sacrificing your own desires for something you considered more valuable (a mother sacrificing her desire for nice clothes so that her child can eat well) was not altruism but an ethical greed, where you espoused your highest value.
You can extend that to the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, considering that Christ considered absorbing the weight of sin unto Himself a worthy trade for the salvation of those He loves (namely, mankind).
Not an inconsistent view here.
10/23/2011 10:08:54 AM
You've never actually read any entries in a dictionary, have you? The whole point of altruism is to sacrifice for a benefit which is not directly yours, you dink. It is not for "no good at all."
Amazing. Against altruism and proclaming true love to be selfish. You sh*tpiles just stun me.
10/23/2011 10:19:55 AM
So saving someone's life, your own child non the less, is selfish? Are you telling me if a father dies protecting his child, he'll go to hell for "selfishly" saving his own child?
So what, do you want the father to just let the child get run over, while thinking that he should save the child, but shouldn't because it's be selfish?
Edit: I just realize, aren't you fundies the one that bitch about humans not being animals, because only animals are selfish because they only think about their own survival? Yet even if the said animal gives it's own life so that another may survive, it's still considered a selfish act.
Please say this guy is a poe...
10/23/2011 10:28:10 AM
Not a poe, just a Randist (who may also be a Christian; you'd be amazed at how many people consider themselves both).
The reason this is not a valid philosophical argument is that Rand's definition of altruism is effectively meaningless, and does not match any other usage of altruism anywhere. From Merriam Webster: Definition of ALTRUISM
: unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others
: behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species.
Neither of these matches the definition in this post, and none of the claims made in this post are relevant to either of those definitions.
10/23/2011 10:50:15 AM
But.....Jesus.....didn't he die for..... *head explodes*
10/23/2011 10:54:51 AM
Now, that was funny. Could you define "love" next?
10/23/2011 11:02:49 AM
10/23/2011 11:15:00 AM
1 2 3