Self-Interest vs Selfishness

[Separatist]

Is there a difference? I think there is, the one being benign and the other malignant. Whatcha think?

[Separatist]

Is the fact of the benign nature of self interest recognized by God when he says, "Love your neighbor as yourself" ?

[marc]

I think this is a good article: http://www.presspublications.com/opinio ... difference" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[davedan]

Fascinating question!

The scriptures don't speak in terms of selflessness vs selfishness. Instead the scriptures speak of charity vs pride.

Charity = pure love of Christ .... for the Father and desire to do His will (nevertheless not as I will)

Pride = do as I will.

In the end, the will of God is the ultimate expression of both perfect selflessness (help others) and self interest (peace, joy, and treasures in heaven)

Zion satisfies wants and needs of all its members. It really is the greatest feast of fat things.

"And in this mountain shall the Lord of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined." (Old Testament, Isaiah 25:6)

[2ndRateMind]

I've been thinking about this a while. Seems to me, they are not the same. Selfishness is putting your self-interest before the interests of others. If we think it virtuous and Christian to put others before ourselves, or, at least, just and fair to weigh up interests equally, then selfishness is the failure to meet that requirement, and self-interest is the reason why.

Cheers, 2RM.

[gclayjr]

If you read Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" there is a famous quote that I think well defines "Self-Interest"

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages”

Selfishness has no regard for others, Self-Interest is more related to doing the right things for yourself, which can be done while respecting the needs and rights of others.

Regards,

George Clay

[2ndRateMind]

Smith, of course, is talking about the way the world is. He says elsewhere 'private vice is public virtue'. He means by this that selfish (or self-interested, whichever you prefer) transactions are the engine of the economy. But I think Jesus asks more of us than this; I think Jesus wants us to rid ourselves of private vice, and then see how much more public good might ensue, than in a society funded by an economy founded on vice, and inclined to excuse it in the economic sphere.

Cheers, 2RM.

[gclayjr]

2ndRateMind,

The OP asked for a definition of the difference between Self-Interest and Selfishness. I think I answered the question. There may be other reasonable answers.

I think that there is better communication when people carefully use words as they are understood to be meant.

I think Jesus wants us to rid ourselves of private vice, and then see how much more public good might ensue, than in a society funded by an economy founded on vice, and inclined to excuse it in the economic sphere.

Are you saying Self-interest is private vice?

Unlike your assertion, it was Bernard Mandeville not Adam Smith that used the term Private Vice. Others have tried to connect the two, but this was never said by Adam Smith.

Regards,

George Clay

[gclayjr]

2ndRateMind,

I dug into this a bit more. Maybe the following quote from a blogger is clarifying what you are trying to say

I would argue that the word “selfishness” is inappropriate. Legitimate self-interest can be a public virtue, yes, but not selfishness. It is not selfish of the baker to want to make a living by selling his baked goods. Sure, he probably does not sell it out of altruistic motives; he sells his because he wants to survive and to take care of his family or other dependants, if he has any. He acts out of a legitimate self-interest, and as a by-product he also happens to feed other people.

https://schriftman.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... ic-virtue/

If what you are trying to say is that Jesus expects us to go beyond self interest, love our neighbor and help him, then I agree

Regards,

George Clay

[davedan]

Self-interest vs. Selfishness is a false dichotomy. Loving others as ourselves, not loving others before ourselves. Loving and serving others serves our self interest as well.

Charity vs. Pride is the real issue. Do as God commands (love others) or do as we will (do whatever).

[Separatist]

Smith, of course, is talking about the way the world is. He says elsewhere 'private vice is public virtue'.

This was Bernard Mandeville in the Fable of the Bees.

Smith said:

What is prudence in the conduct of every private family can scarce be folly in that of a great kingdom.

His Theory of Moral Sentiments is key.

[gclayjr]

Separatist,

It looks like you are fairly well read on this subject. Then maybe you are looking for something more subtle than simply describing the difference between self-interest and selfishness.

If you don't feel that the responses above have provided you with the information you were seeking, maybe you can rephrase the question so as to make it more clear what you are looking for.

Regards,

George Clay

P.S.

By the way I just read Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations about 1 month ago. It is one of those books that people talk about, but because of its size few have actually read it... including me... until a month ago

[Separatist]

I enjoy getting others opinions on it

[gclayjr]

Separatist,

Cooooool. I guess it is something that philosophers and Economists have discussed a lot. I think the true analogy from Adam Smith is the concept of
"The invisible hand". This is at the core of Free market economics. There are those, particularly Marx, and other socialists who feel that an economy should be planned and managed to be "Fair". If you are well read, then I might assume you are familiar with Hayek's book "The Fatal Conceit" which carefully documents the horrors of planned economies.

So I guess I might ask you. Which do you think is a more righteous system. A free market system where the sum of the knowledge of the many citizens works like the "invisible hand" to insure the best use of resources, or do you believe a planned economy where some benevolent leader tells everybody what to make and how much of it to make?

Are you one of those who thinks that Consecration is God's socialism?

:-\

Regards,

George Clay

[bornfree]

A person who is intelligent and prudent can have self interest while including others needs and. make them a part of our self interest. If you desire something just for yourself that is called selfish, but if running a business and making decisions for the well being and prosperity of employees, that being the motivation, you are not being selfish, even though you will benefit financially far greater than the employees. The challenge then becomes keeping employees satisfied with the mere pitance they receive in comparison.

[2ndRateMind]

Smith, of course, is talking about the way the world is. He says elsewhere 'private vice is public virtue'.

This was Bernard Mandeville in the Fable of the Bees...

Indeed, it was. Silly me. Nevertheless, I think my central points remain to be answered.

Incidentally, Jesus seemed not to have much time for self-interest:

27 Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.

28 If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith?

29 And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind.

30 For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things.

31 But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Luke, 12:27-31 KJV

I remember hearing once a modern parable about the difference between heaven and hell. A Chinese economist was asked by St Peter to which of them he preferred to go to. 'I need to see them both' said the economist, 'before I decide'. St Peter obliged, and the economist was shown Hell. There were huge trestle tables, laden with all kinds of delicious food and drink. But those sitting at them were all malnourished and starving. The reason was clear; they were trying to eat with chopsticks, four feet long, and failing miserably.

Then he was shown heaven. The same tables, the same delicious food and drink, the same four-foot chopsticks, but here the people were all well-fed, healthy and hale. 'So', asked the economist, 'why is it so different, here?'
'Ah, well' said St Peter 'in Hell, the people try to feed themselves. In Heaven, they feed each other.'

And that is my point about self-interest. If you live in a world where each attends only to their own self-interest, only one person will be concerned by you, and that is you. If you live in a world where each looks after each other, you will be the target of the concern of over 7 billion people.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Separatist]

Separatist,

Cooooool. I guess it is something that philosophers and Economists have discussed a lot. I think the true analogy from Adam Smith is the concept of
"The invisible hand". This is at the core of Free market economics. There are those, particularly Marx, and other socialists who feel that an economy should be planned and managed to be "Fair". If you are well read, then I might assume you are familiar with Hayek's book "The Fatal Conceit" which carefully documents the horrors of planned economies.

So I guess I might ask you. Which do you think is a more righteous system. A free market system where the sum of the knowledge of the many citizens works like the "invisible hand" to insure the best use of resources, or do you believe a planned economy where some benevolent leader tells everybody what to make and how much of it to make?

Are you one of those who thinks that Consecration is God's socialism?

:-\

Regards,

George Clay

Smith:

All systems either of preference or of restraint, therefore, being thus completely taken away, the obvious and simple system of natural liberty establishes itself of its own accord. Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man, or order of men.

vs

Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments

The man of system, on the contrary, is apt to be very wise in his own conceit; and is often so enamoured with the supposed beauty of his own ideal plan of government, that he cannot suffer the smallest deviation from any part of it. He goes on to establish it completely and in all its parts, without any regard either to the great interests, or to the strong prejudices which may oppose it. He seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess-board. He does not consider that the pieces upon the chess-board have no other principle of motion besides that which the hand impresses upon them; but that, in the great chess-board of human society, every single piece has a principle of motion of its own, altogether different from that which the legislature might chuse to impress upon it. If those two principles coincide and act in the same direction, the game of human society will go on easily and harmoniously, and is very likely to be happy and successful. If they are opposite or different, the game will go on miserably, and the society must be at all times in the highest degree of disorder.

I believe in natural liberty and not the man of system. I believe consecration is property held in stewardship. That men will be free to use is as they will, with an eye single to the glory of God, dedicating surplus to the poor.

[Separatist]

Incidentally, Jesus seemed not to have much time for self-interest:

idk, when God says "Love your neighbor as yourself", He is actually affirming self interest.

We all have a self interest in our own well being, our health, our families, our conditions, both spiritual and material. Some have great interests in science, others agriculture, others industry etc...It is not wrong to pursue your interests. God is however reminding us that we ought to love others, even as we love ourselves. This feeling towards others also seems to be a natural spark within us. Smith stated in the first sentence of Theory of Moral Sentiments: How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it.

Seeing to others happiness, does indeed make us happy. It is also natural to have feelings of envy, greed etc. The battle is within all of us as to which wins out. The selfish don't care in the fortunes or happiness of others. The self interest moves beyond what is normal and good, to what is destructive.

[diligently seeking]

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... r?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Separatist]

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... r?lang=eng

Great talk. Quotes:

So many times prophets warn about the dangers of selfishness—the inordinate and excessive concern with self.

Selfishness, in its preoccupation with self, withholds from others...

So it we take away "inordinate" "excessive" "preoccupation" what are we left with? Normal self interest. I think there is a difference.

[gclayjr]

Separatist,

I have so long believed in a "Republican" (not to be confused with the party) form of limited government, that I find it hard to even understand how anybody can HONESTLY believe in Socialism. For that reason, I have spent a lot of time reading and trying to understand arguments that go beyond sound bites of "Equality" and "Fairness" to try and understand how a thinking person could honestly believe this stuff.

Recently, I read a book on the History of Marxism. I had a bit of an aha moment, and I posted my thoughts here on a thread "Cats, Cows, and Bees" . Which I think ties in well with your "Man of the system" quote above. Marxists have the concept of "Historical Materialism" . Which I think indicates that their problem is with the nature of the free agency of man. Because of this free agency, organizing man can be like that cliche "Herding Cats". This is a well known humorous metaphor for the fact that we are independent beings who are not easy to control (For the betterment of society). Marxist think that Human evolution will eventually make us more like Bees. A society where, without central control, everybody works together to perform their part of making the society work (This explains the funny idea that anarchists and Communists are fellow travelers).

The Communists believe that for man to evolve to the "ideal" of Bees they must be forced through a transition where they are forced to work together, like herding Cows. That is why every Socialist government becomes a totalitarian hell. Since men are more like cats, and will always be more like cats, these governments are always frustrated at trying to force the second stage of their "Historical evolution".

As far as how I think consecration works, I think you said it well, and I have nothing to add.

Regards,

George Clay

[Separatist]

Separatist,

I have so long believed in a "Republican" (not to be confused with the party) form of limited government,

I completely agree with this. Naturally formed, "organic" communities. Small republics. This is a fantastic talk on the subject of Jeffersonian republicanism and the ideas of appropriate human scale - if you can find the time (about an hour)

https://vimeo.com/83268208" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[diligently seeking]

Oh that we all would seek after this cause and affect when it comes to our Selfintrest↓↓



Behold, it came to pass that I, Enos, knowing my father that he was a just man—for he taught me in his language, and also in the nurture and admonition of the Lord—and blessed be the name of my God for it—

2 And I will tell you of thewrestle which I had before God, before I received aremission of my sins.

3 Behold, I went to hunt beasts in the forests; and the words which I had often heard my father speak concerning eternal life, and the joy of the saints, sunkdeep into my heart.

4 And my soul hungered; and I kneeled down before my Maker, and I cried unto him in mighty prayer and supplication for mine own soul; and all the day long did I cry unto him; yea, and when the night came I did still raise my voice high that it reached the heavens.

5 And there came a voiceunto me, saying: Enos, thy sins are forgiven thee, and thou shalt be blessed.

[gclayjr]

2ndRateMind,

you said

Incidentally, Jesus seemed not to have much time for self-interest:

I submit he dedicated his life to his own interest which was to show all of his brothers and sisters how to be saved.

Is it not true that a person who loves his neighbor, and dedicates his life to the service of others ends up happier than someone who has spent his life and energy pursuing pleasure?

what better self interest is there than to pursue such happiness?

Regards,

George Clay

[rewcox]

A person who is intelligent and prudent can have self interest while including others needs and. make them a part of our self interest. If you desire something just for yourself that is called selfish, but if running a business and making decisions for the well being and prosperity of employees, that being the motivation, you are not being selfish, even though you will benefit financially far greater than the employees. The challenge then becomes keeping employees satisfied with the mere pitance they receive in comparison.

If the owners are nice it should be ok. Greedy capitalism is selfish in nature.