Altruism Watch

This discussion is closed.
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#21
Report 13 years ago
#21
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
I'm not missing the point, it is fair and just to question the pillars of this issue up for debate.

Look. Its fairly simple. If you have an abstract discussion about whether or not altruism can exist - whether you can PROVE what people want or not is neither here nor there. It is entirely irrelevant to the debate. You are essentially focusing on something that doesnt matter.
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#22
Report 13 years ago
#22
(Original post by Lawz-)
Look. Its fairly simple. If you have an abstract discussion about whether or not altruism can exist - whether you can PROVE what people want or not is neither here nor there. It is entirely irrelevant to the debate. You are essentially focusing on something that doesnt matter.
I disagree, you suggesting it doesn't matter is personal opinion and not forum 'law'. This is a discussion and I'm questioning whether you can have an abstract debate about such a topic. :tsr:
0
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#23
Report 13 years ago
#23
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
I disagree, you suggesting it doesn't matter is personal opinion and not forum 'law'. This is a discussion and I'm questioning whether you can have an abstract debate about such a topic. :tsr:
Ok well if you say so. Fact is you are contradicting a whole host of philosophers who have had the abstract discussion for centuries.

Its rather odd to have an illogical opinion and just say "well I'm entitled to an opinion". Unless you can back it up with logic you have an opinion on shakey ground.
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#24
Report 13 years ago
#24
(Original post by Lawz-)
Ok well if you say so. Fact is you are contradicting a whole host of philosophers who have had the abstract discussion for centuries.

Its rather odd to have an illogical opinion and just say "well I'm entitled to an opinion". Unless you can back it up with logic you have an opinion on shakey ground.
Whose missing the point now? Philosophers do not tell the divine truth or the logical truth, neither do you or I. They suggest opinions and viewpoints. Just like you and I.
You cannot simply deem something illogical if it does not follow your way of thought. I have attempted to back my argument up, but you seem fixated with me not conforming to what you or others say.
Why should altruism merely be a philosophical debate when it can be argued on so many different levels, one of which I am attempting to take you.
0
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#25
Report 13 years ago
#25
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
Whose missing the point now? Philosophers do not tell the divine truth or the logical truth, neither do you or I. They suggest opinions and viewpoints. Just like you and I.
You cannot simply deem something illogical if it does not follow your way of thought. I have attempted to back my argument up, but you seem fixated with me not conforming to what you or others say.
Why should altruism merely be a philosophical debate when it can be argued on so many different levels, one of which I am attempting to take you.
Because I was having a philosophical debate, and you responded to it. Thus, you entered a philosophical debate. Thus you should be able to deal with it with that in mind.

No one is a delphic oracle of truth, but you do need to have some weight of logic behind your opinion. You dont have any in this case. But this seems like Im beating my head against a wall. Tell you what - go away -read up on egoism a bit, then come back.
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 13 years ago
#26
(Original post by Lawz-)
Because I was having a philosophical debate, and you responded to it. Thus, you entered a philosophical debate. Thus you should be able to deal with it with that in mind.

No one is a delphic oracle of truth, but you do need to have some weight of logic behind your opinion. You dont have any in this case. But this seems like Im beating my head against a wall. Tell you what - go away -read up on egoism a bit, then come back.
Because YOU were having a philosophical debate does not justify why everyone else should. Remember the comment on egoism? :rolleyes:
0
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#27
Report 13 years ago
#27
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
Because YOU were having a philosophical debate does not justify why everyone else should. Remember the comment on egoism? :rolleyes:
I think youve misunderstood the meaning of the term.

And you replied to MY point which was about the philosophical aspects of the issue. As such you were replying to a point that entailed that as part of the discussion. Isnt it odd to reply to it with an entirely irrelevant point?
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#28
Report 13 years ago
#28
(Original post by Lawz-)
I think youve misunderstood the meaning of the term.

And you replied to MY point which was about the philosophical aspects of the issue. As such you were replying to a point that entailed that as part of the discussion. Isnt it odd to reply to it with an entirely irrelevant point?
Odd? Yes. Irrelevant? No. Bored of this argument? Since half past four.
0
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#29
Report 13 years ago
#29
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
Odd? Yes. Irrelevant? No. Bored of this argument? Since half past four.
Odd? Yes.

Irrelevant to the point I made - Yes.

Bored of this argument? Then leave. I could care less. I have grown tired of debating the point with someone unable to grasp basic philosophy.
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#30
Report 13 years ago
#30
(Original post by Lawz-)
Odd? Yes.

Irrelevant to the point I made - Yes.

Bored of this argument? Then leave. I could care less. I have grown tired of debating the point with someone unable to grasp basic philosophy.
Lol, nice. Real nice. I hope your other 3,000 and so posts have been as good. I suggest you pull that stick out of your bottom (to put it nicely).
0
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#31
Report 13 years ago
#31
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
Lol, nice. Real nice. I hope your other 3,000 and so posts have been as good. I suggest you pull that stick out of your bottom (to put it nicely).
And I suggest you learn to think logically, and discover something about a topic if you wish to speak on it.
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 13 years ago
#32
(Original post by Lawz-)
And I suggest you learn to think logically, and discover something about a topic if you wish to speak on it.
And I suggest we make sweet love in the sand.
0
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#33
Report 13 years ago
#33
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
And I suggest we make sweet love in the sand.
And I suggest you listen to you parents and go to bed now; its lights out time little boy.
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#34
Report 13 years ago
#34
(Original post by Lawz-)
And I suggest you listen to you parents and go to bed now; its lights out time little boy.
Little boy? You wish!
0
Lawz-
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#35
Report 13 years ago
#35
(Original post by AnOdeToNoOne)
Little boy? You wish!
Youre in the 6th form. You are about 18. You are thus a little boy. So you are excused your ignorance.
0
momosan
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#36
Report 13 years ago
#36
(Original post by Lawz-)
Youre in the 6th form. You are about 18. You are thus a little boy. So you are excused your ignorance.
Yep, because traditionally when males turn 18 they celebrate becoming a little boy.
0
milady
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#37
Report 13 years ago
#37
(Original post by bohogirlie)
So what do you think? Can people be truely altruistic? If so give an example.
Yeah, I think you could argue people can't be altruistic.

Because, when you help a stranger, it could be in order to be a good person - because that makes you feel good, or because you'll get some heavenly reward, or you'll achieve some inner satisfaction from the performing of good deeds... you could still want to help them, genuinely, but there would also be selfish ulterior motives... so it wouldn't be truly altruistic.

Helping friends or family isn't totally altruistic... goes without saying. One selfishly enjoys the love etc they receive from family.

I think it's very hard for someone to do something truly, completely altruistic.

I think the only person who has ever done something utterly altruistic is Jesus.
0
RichardAnderson
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#38
Report 13 years ago
#38
well personaly i don't believe in it as everything you do will give you some self satisfaction etc. However i believe an act can be altruistic say if you was to do something with intent to get a certain reward, like opening a door for someone to get a thankyou but not recieving the thanyou then that would be an act of altruism.
0
shadowkin
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#39
Report 13 years ago
#39
(Original post by RichardAnderson)
well personaly i don't believe in it as everything you do will give you some self satisfaction etc. However i believe an act can be altruistic say if you was to do something with intent to get a certain reward, like opening a door for someone to get a thankyou but not recieving the thanyou then that would be an act of altruism.
not quite, because you went with the intention to get a reward. If you don't get one, and this happens repeatedly and then you keep doing the same action then perhaps it is altruism.
0
RichardAnderson
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#40
Report 13 years ago
#40
yes but the inital action would be altruism what happens after that is any ones guess
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?

Yes (30)
27.03%
No - I got the required grades (67)
60.36%
No - I missed the required grades and didn't get in (14)
12.61%

Watched Threads

View All