OK, I’ll give it a shot, although it’s probably a waste of time:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Look, to live, you HAVE to have your self-interest as your primary motivation. [/quote]
I could argue that, from a biological perspective [which you happily deny] you are hardwired to do this automatically, so why bother. However, from a metaphysical standpoint [which you happily support, you know, gawd and the afterlife] there is much to gain from total altruism.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
To deliberately act against your own good would eventually result in your death…unless you could get someone else to suffer the consequences in your place.[/quote]
Acting towards other people’s good does not constitute going actively against your good at all, especially not since you wnat to keep on living to help others, right? I could even argue that a whole utopic society of altruists [the one that your Jesus wanted to establish, remember?] would be a nice place, since everyone would make sure nobody would suffer.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The reason the world is a slaughterhouse is because the morality we practice (unselfishness) is not rational or possible, unless victims can be found to suffer the consequences of unselfishness. [/quote]
Who do you mean with “we practise”? For the largest part, the world is a slaughterhouse because man can get away with the opposite of even basic morality [categorical imperative, which nearly every culture knows] and benefit tremendously from it. This is a no brainer. Under these circumstances, many religions [eg Jesus] tried to explore the possibilities of doing it the other way around. Deus caritas est, right?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Altruism can only exist because governments force people to be altruistic. They have to use force to gain acquiescence.[/quote]
Total and utter BS.You should know at your age. Governments normally do profit enormously from spending a few bucks abroad. It’s political influence that is assured. Even objectively, we hardly help anyone. One well here, one school there, next comes a nice civil war and we start again. You probably know that for instance, the american AIDS help for Africa is intertwined with catholic preachers, who advise to practise chastity -as opposed to use condoms. With known effect.
Even if we effectively helped these “poor” people, it wouldn’t be altruism, because this requires a a conscious effort. You talk about forced taxation.Altruism can only exist without someone commanding you.
And if you truly believe the “state” , namely it’s key leaders are altruists, or better altruistic dictators (who in essence can’t be altruists anymore, rather idiots with pseudo- samaritan issues), who sacrifice their people’s efforts to help others, you’re dillusional. This is hard, geopolitical strategy.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Because altruism causes violence, its not really a morality at all.[/quote]
You have to show me yet how true altruism causes violence.
Also, a morality can of course cause violence. If you happen to defend an old Lady against muggers, you cause (in my eyes and yours (???) righteous) violence.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
So, since humans have no morality, they become animals (which is really the goal of those who preach unselfishness). [/quote]
It’s the other way around from a biological perspective. Since we are higher animals, we have morals.
And show me one culture at any time who goes against the categorical imperative. Morality is in us. Although we can bend it around and find loopholes for complex or even simple dilemma which every society, it’s leaders and especially it’s prophets did for a living.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
They become fit for rule.
[/quote]
Altruism> violence> degeneration> easy to rule?
???