[Ansteorra] Motivations (was: Love and recognition)

Jean Paul de Sens jeanpauldesens at gmail.com
Tue Sep 26 12:35:34 PDT 2006


I was using dictionary.coms :

"Having no regard to self; unselfish. "

I'm certain that most of the service type work that people do in the SCA
comes down to this root:

1) The SCA is fun for me.
2) The SCA needs people to do work to continue.
3) I am willing to do #2 to preserve and further #1


On 9/26/06, Lori Campbell <countesskat at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I just honestly don't believe in "selflessness"
>
> Then it is fortunate for those of us who DO believe that your lack of
> belief doesn't mean it can't exist. :)
>
> If I put enough effort into it, I could probably dream up some kind of
> positive benefit from most of my choices, but that isn't the same as
> being selfish or self-centered (which would require me to calculate the
> positive rate of return before I did anything - and I'm far too lazy
> for that).
>
> I suppose it is true that some people don't do anything without first
> considering if there is any potential benefit for themselves.  I don't
> think it is fair to say that EVERYBODY does or that it is a bad thing.
> I have, however, had the privilege of witnessing many, many selfless
> acts from people in our game, and hearing stories of so many more.
> Those people inspire me to do better in my own life.
>
> > So is my selfishness which helps others better or worse than doing
> > nothing?
>
> FWIW, my office dictionary gives this definition for "selfless" =
> giving or sharing in abundance and without hesitation; unselfish,
> (unselfish = chivalrous, noble, altruistic, generous)
>
> It gives this definition for "selfish" = thinking *only* of oneself,
> narcissistic
>
> I have to wonder if you would do all that you do if you were the ONLY
> one who stood to benefit?  Or, to take it further, if you would do
> something that would be of great benefit to you, but which would harm
> those you care about?  If not, then perhaps selfish isn't a good
> descriptive for you.  It is fortunate that we don't get to define
> ourselves very often because I'm pretty sure most of the people you
> know in the SCA wouldn't use "selfish" to describe you either.  At
> least, I haven't noticed any piles of bloody corpses in your wake.
>
> Kat M.


My selfishness has a long view, and very much subscribes to the "if you do
good for and to others, it comes back to you."  If however, I found that
doing good to/for others didn't have that result, i.e. it harmed me, I would


a) self-examing to make sure I was really "doing good" or perhaps I was just
perceiving it.
or
b) figure out a more beneficial course of action.

Many people in our group, whether consciously or un, subscribe to similar
philosophies, or a philosophy similar enough that their actions are the
same.  When our group has a large work chore to do, we all pitch in to get
it done quickly, because

a) what benefits the group benefits the individual and
b) we'd hope the group will do the same for us in the future.
c) sooner your friend is done working, the sooner the two of you can go get
a beer and tell stories :)

To go back to the philosophy, I'm not sure a person would ever commit an
action that was totally selfless, i.e. of no, zero, zilch, nada, potential
benefit to the committer.

I'll fully willing to believe that many people have committed acts that were
selfless (or even had negative potential benefit) to the committers, but not
on purpose :)

JP




-- 
I want to fight and to strive, to vie with my opponents and friends, and at
the end of the day cry out "ENOUGH!!! For I can lift my arms no longer"

That is what is good in life.



More information about the Ansteorra mailing list