m y . t h o u g h t s . o n . t h i n g s

3/25/03
Ok, this is just something that I’ve been throwing around in my head recently. I can’t say that I necessarily am choosing to believe it and stand by it, yet the reasons I am making the choice not to stand by it almost shows support for the theory itself....so, I don’t know!

I guess the ‘proper’ term is psychological egoism. Or the concept that everything we do in life is because of reasons that derive from the self. This theory is usually regarded as though everything we do has selfish motives. Most people automatically dismiss this idea. They think that only “selfish”, “self-centered” people would ever consider this option. “Then how do you explain Mother Teresa?” “Parents sacrificing their lives for their kids?” “How can you explain love, then?” and other questions like this.

It’s not that I want to think that this is how things work. It’s not that I want to be considered selfish or self-centered. Yet, the fact that I would not allow myself to consider these ideas because I don’t want to be considered self-centered only helps to prove that I am self-focused!! so, maybe we all do care about ourselves. Maybe everything we do is because of some reasons that derive from the self (I refrain from using the word ‘selfish’ because of the underlying negative connotations) Maybe Mother Teresa can be explained...

(I know that in saying some of this stuff, I am only going to be getting myself in trouble. This is a real touchy subject, for I am putting myself in the worst possible light...but at least I’m being completely honest in considering this as an option.)

I’ve already written a whole essay on Love and Marriage and strongly take the stance that love is a thing given away, not only a thing received. How in the world can I believe that and still be considering psychological egoism as an option?! This seems to create a conflict, but I don’t really think it does: Love is greatest when it is given away. Love is self-sacrificing, right? Yes. and no. The question goes down to: Why do we love? Why do we give of ourselves? I think that love, true love, fulfills. When we are able to be at that point where we are open to giving all of ourselves, we open ourselves to being filled with love. We gain from the process. Sure, love can hurt. But have you ever heard the saying, “it’s better to have loved and lost to have never loved at all”? WHY is it better to have loved and lost? Because love is fulfilling. Because experiencing love does something to our insides, loving allows us to understand others, and in turn, understand ourselves.

Why do we do charity work? Why do I volunteer my time working with kids? When we do things for others, when we make someone else happy, when wedo a good deed that no one sees, just for the sake of doing it...why do we do these? I think you must admit that something about these things makes us feel good inside. Giving a sandwich to a homeless guy makes you feel as though maybe you helped him...as though maybe you made a difference in the grand scheme of things somehow. Mother Teresa? I bet she was very fulfilled. I bet she had a peaceful understanding to life that I would like to have. I also bet that she liked being fulfilled and chose to peruse the burden of helping others.

Parents sacrificing their lives for their kids? I’ve heard an evolutionary explanation for this regarding the inner desire for our species or our kin to survive us...but I’m not going to argue from this point. I’m going to argue from an angle that will probably sound quite a bit more “selfish”. (disclaimer: I am not a parent. I have no kids. Perhaps my thinking will change when I become a mother. For now, all I can go on is what I’ve gained from being the oldest in a large family and the responsibility felt towards my younger siblings.) As I discussed in my Death essay, I think that the sadness we feel at someone’s death is not for the deceased, but for ourselves and our own grief. WE miss the person, WE are sad without them, WE are hurting inside. Perhaps (and oh, I know I will getting in so much trouble for this one, please think about where I’m coming from before you respond with evil hate mail, please!) one of the things that drives a parent to sacrifice their lives is the fact that they couldn’t bear their pain if it was the other way around. Who wants to be alive while their child is dead? Wouldn’t it be much better to be the one dead yourself? What about the pain caused to the child when the parent is gone? perhaps it is worse pain to be alive without a mother or father than to be dead. But a parent does not consider this for their child at that moment of self-sacrifice...I do not know exactly what they do consider at this moment, having never been there myself, but it seems to me that this issue can be argued as an argument FOR psychological egotism as well as against it.

I guess I’m also trying to show that maybe we were built with these inner desires for love and to be fulfilled and to not experience pain for a reason. Maybe it’s really not that horrible of a thing to act in our own self-interest. Maybe that’s why our own self-interest was given to us...to guide us, to instill in us a direction, a right and wrong way. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” The Golden Rule only really makes sense when we are aware of ourselves and what we what.

p.s. after writing all the above, I did some actual internet research on psychological egoism...I discovered almost everyone is against it, not surprisingly! I also discovered that most of the stuff on psychological egoism is written in a language that most likely will only make sense to other philosophers or psychologists. So it comes down to this: either I am merely stupid and unlearned and they are learned and elitist (which could very well be) or neither of us know and what I think has as much possibility of being right as what they think! (of course, neither of us could be right too!)

last updated:
9/21/04