Castle Paradox

[Flamer]

yes, thanks setu... the other guy...
but the game has it's ups and downs.

selfish is defined as the person only thinking about himself/herself when recieving something or giving something..
that's what i think it is.
_________________
If we were a pack of dogs, IM would be a grand Hound, CN would be a very ficious little pitball, and Giz...well, it doesn't matter breed he is, he'd still be a bitch
(no offense to anyone that was mentioned)

[Camdog]

From dictionary.com:

Selfish: Caring supremely or unduly for one's self; regarding one's own comfort, advantage, etc., in disregard, or at the expense, of those of others.

Hence, Mr. Rogers is not selfish. (Of course, I thought Rinku was just joking...)

[Rolling Stone]

Rinku you prove my point better than I ever could have:

Mister Rogers is quoted as calling himself an altruist, and there's nothing more altruistic than having such a pleasant show for children.

By your definition you are one hundred percent correct, he is selfish in his pursuit, there's nothing more selfish than having such a pleasant show for children.

Potato potato, wait that doesn't work here, ketchup catsup. To argue on the definitions is silly, it changes nothing, the reality of it is that Mister Rogers has a wonderful show that's helped thousands of children find their self worth. That's not altruistic or selfish, it's just what Mister Rogers does (not did, the show is still on in reruns). And if you think the word you use to describe that is more important than the act itself, then you're as stupid as you look (Assuming you are a little rodent with a pancake on your head).
_________________
BANDIT REVOLVER, DOWNLOAD IT OR ELSE.

http://www.castleparadox.com/forum/gamelist-display.php?game=620

[Me]

It's a rabbit. Rabbits are not rodents, they are LAGOMORPHS.
And I don't understand Rinku here, either.
Unless he's joking, which is entirely possible.
_________________
UP DOWN UP DOWN LEFT LEFT RIGHT RIGHT A B START

[Rinku]

no, i'm not joking. think clearly about what mr. rogers is doing. he likes children. he likes to see children happy, it is a value he likes to create. therefore children being happy is in his self-interest. therefore the more he does it, the more selfish he is.

of course the word matters. to call it selfless is simply wrong, because he's not sacrificing himself, he loses nothing and he gains much. his power and his happiness grow with every episode he did.

calling mr. rogers altruistic is a misinformed as calling firefighters and teachers altruistic. what, the firefighter isn't selfish to put out the fire? what, the teacher isn't selfish to help children know more? any time a person does something and gains value from it, it's selfish. firefighting and teaching are no more inherently altruistic careers than ceo and lawyer are. all careers can be done selfishly (i.e., well) or altruistically (i.e., destructively).
_________________
Tower Defense Game

[Shadowiii]

So you are saying that anyone who does anything benifical for a community, if he/she recieves anything in return, that person is selfish?

Like say I went to help a neighbor move, and I worked on their house for a few hours, and afterword they gave me an ice-cream, I would be selfish?

Or, in another example, if I decided to go visit the elderly and assist them in living, where my only reward was that I felt good about myself, then I would still be a selfish person because I was enjoying what I was doing?

So according to your definition the only selfless people are people who better the community and hate every minute of it and gain nothing from it, while everyone is selfish. Though your definitions follow the strict definitions of the worlds, society has come to alter the meanings of these words.

Argh, I like Mr. Rogers.......
_________________
But enough talk, have at you!

[The Wobbler]

[Pepsi Ranger]

I'm starting to think that maybe Gilbert is onto something here about the way words are defined. Nevermind how the dictionary or society defines them. We're basing this discussion on how an individual defines them.

But for the sake of consistency and argument, here's how the dictionary defines the two words, according to the Reader's Digest Oxford Complete Wordfinder:

selfish adj.

1. deficient in consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure; actuated by self-interest. 2. (of a motive, etc.) appealing to self-interest. --selfishly adv. selfishness n.
()inconsiderate, thoughtless, ungenerous, illiberal, grudging, uncharitable; self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing, self-seeking, self-loving, self-centered, self-absorbed, self-interested, self-serving, egotistic(al), egoistic(al); greedy, acquisitive, covetous, grasping, avaricious, mercenary.

altruism n.

1. regard for others as a principle of action. 2. unselfishness; concern for other people. --altruist n. altruistic adj. altruistically adv. [F altruisme f. It. altrui somebody else (infl. by L alter other)]
()2. selflessness, self-sacrifice, unselfishness, philanthropy, beneficence, generosity, charity, charitableness, humanitarianism, humaneness, benevolence, largesse, humanity, public-spiritedness. --altruist see philanthropist (PHILANTHROPY). altruistic see SELFLESS.

If anybody feels that these definitions are in error, please speak up now.

Key words I would like to highlight for selfish for the sake of this discussion are "deficient in consideration for others," and "concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure," and the whole list of related words at the end.

The key fragments I would like to highlight for altruism are "concern for other people," and the whole list of related words.

It's true that Mr. Rogers needed to eat and make a life for himself, otherwise he would've died the moment his parents stopped taking care of him, and then we wouldn't have grown up with his television show, but that doesn't mean that he was deficient in consideration for others, or concerned chiefly with his own personal profit or pleasure. Granted, none of us know his true character, and it was possible that he could've very easily been driven by greed instead of concern for children. But the fact remains that NONE OF US know what his motives were. We can call him selfish or altruistic all we want, but we can only judge by how we ourselves have been affected.

To further develop that notion, millions of young adults who grew up with Mr. Rogers learned a lot about imagination, friendship, and good will from that show. To us, he was an altruist. Earning a living may very well have been a benefit to producing the show, but he could've just as easily made a living as a hitman (in theory). If he had become a hitman, he wouldn't have helped so many children across the country (or the world if it's broadcasted globally). He still would've gotten paid, but it would've been in disregard to the victim's family. His heart may have still been selfish, but who are we to claim that? There are people in the world who have genuine good will toward others. The fact that they would like to eat today so that they have the strength to help those in need tomorrow is NOT deficient in consideration for others.

And as far as the Nazis are concerned, six million Jews would have agreed that they were not acting with good will in mind. They were not being concerned with other people (i.e. "Gosh, I hope the Jews are okay with this," said the Nazi with the machine gun in hand.), and they were not doing anything that was helpful to anyone but themselves. It was possible that they were charitable in the thirties, but I really don't know that for sure. There may have been some decent Germans in the group who meant to do good, but were brainwashed into practicing genocide. None of us know the true hearts of the individuals. But the group as a whole would not have eliminated six million people if they were altruistic. Being altruistic to one's self or organization is not being altruistic. The key thought here is "others centered." The Nazis as a whole were not others centered. They were selfish. Trying to take over the world in order to be the dominate race is not others centered. It is selfish. Trying to help children learn how to tie a shoe so that they don't trip all over themselves later on is others centered. Therefore it is altruistic, and good. Not selfish.

And just to hit the point home here, here is the definition of love as written in The Message:

Love never gives up.
Love cares more for others than for self.
Love doesn't want what it doesn't have.
Love doesn't strut,
Doesn't have a swelled head,
Doesn't force itself on others,
Isn't always "me first,"
Doesn't fly off the handle,
Doesn't keep score of the sins of others,
Doesn't revel when others grovel,
Takes pleasure in the flowering of truth,
Puts up with anything,
Trusts God always,
Always looks for the best,
Never looks back,
But keeps going to the end.

That definition seems to line up far closer to altruism than it does to selfishness. So someone please tell me how in the world altruism is evil and selfishness is not. And if you need me to define evil:

evil adj. & n.

()adj. 1. morally bad; wicked. 2. harmful or tending to harm, esp. intentionally or characteristically. 3. disagreeable or unpleasant (has an evil temper). 4. unlucky; causing misfortune (evil days).
()n. 1. an evil thing; an instance of something evil. 2. evil quality; wickedness; harm.
()adj. 1. bad, wicked, awful, wrong, immoral, sinful, nefarious, iniquitous, heinous, base, corrupt, vile, damnable, villainous, flagitious, foul, nasty, abominable, infamous, atrocious, horrible, horrid, ghastly, grisly, dreadful, depraved, vicious, malevolent, evil-minded, colloq. accursed. 2. harmful, hurtful, destructive, pernicious, injurious, mischievous, detrimental, ruinous, deleterious, disastrous, catastrophic, noxious, malignant, malign, poisonous, deadly, lethal, black-hearted, literary malefict; virulent, toxic; treacherous, traitorous, perfidious, insidious, unscrupulous, unprincipled, dishonest, knavish, dishonorable, crooked, criminal, felonious, sinister, literary malificent. 3. disagreeable, unpleasant, bad, disgusting, repulsive, awful, nasty, foul, vile, offensive, noxious; putrid, mephitic. 4. unlucky, unfortunate, ominous, inauspicious, dire, unpropitious, infelicitous.
()n. 1. sin, vice, iniquity, crime. 2. wickedness, badness, evildoing, wrongdoing, iniquity, immorality, devilry, villainy, nefariousness, viciousness, vileness, heinousness, flagitiousness, foulness, baseness, corruption, degradation, depravity, degeneracy, formal turpitude; harm, hurt, injury, mischief, damage; ruin, calamity, misfortune, catastrophe, destruction, disaster; misery, suffering, pain, sorrow, agony, anguish, archaic or literary woe.

Yeah, there are too many words here.

But seriously, tell me where being "others centered" falls into the category of evil. Anybody.

Once again, I think Gilbert may be onto something when he said that altruism is being looked at from a different perspective, but then who among us would know that when reading a review? A word is defined a certain way in order to keep the language it's written in consistent with everyone who speaks it. To go against it would mean becoming a rebel.

And the definition for rebel is:

...

Oh, nevermind.
_________________
Progress Report:

The Adventures of Powerstick Man: Extended Edition

Currently Updating: General sweep of the game world and dialogue boxes. Adding extended maps.

Tightfloss Maiden

Currently Updating: Chapter 2

[Squall]

Sad thing is, I just saw this argument on an episode of Friends.

[Rinku]

"So you are saying that anyone who does anything benifical for a community, if he/she recieves anything in return, that person is selfish? "

no, that isn't what i was saying. reread the post if necessary.

re pepsi and definitions: i do not use definitions, moreover i consider resorting to a dictionary to define for you the words that you use to be very rude, so i won't continue the discussion in that manner.
_________________
Tower Defense Game

[Camdog]

Er... Why is resorting to dictionary definitions rude? That's what this discussion is about, isn't it? That fact that you're using two words in atypical ways is confusing people, so what the words mean is the the crux of this argument. How else can we properly communicate with each other if we disagree on the basic definitions of the words we're discussing?

[Durandal]

[Machu]

It appears that the "selfish" he is refering to is merely doing stuff for self benefit in some way. By this definition, every action is selfish to some degree, like it makes you happy, or it helps you survive, or several other reasons that eventually loop back to oneself. I want to save the world because I want to live in a perfect place and be happy that others can as well. Nothing is perfectly "selfless", and I can't think of a way to measure how self-promoting things are or if the concept of selflessness truly exists. I don't consider "helping others" part of selflessness, because as mentioned in my reason to save the world, anything that betters society helps oneself as well. I'm also having trouble conceiving a "true altruism" because of reasons mentioned earlier. I'm assuming that Rinku thinks that altruists are deceiving themselves, right?

I've noticed that the main problem with this whole argument is definitions and word usage. Part of this can be blamed on language itself, but I honestly think that Rinku should try to be less vague.

And of course, this thread is so off-topic. The topic was supposed to be about offensive material and its effect on reviews and ratings, right? I've already touched up on this in a more relevant thread.
_________________

[Me]

If you think about things the way Rinku does, you realize that it is almost impossible to be totally altruistic. In order to perform an act of utter altruism, one would have to do something for someone else who they didn't like that would kill them and make the other person's life better. And even if one acheived that, there would still be some selfishness, as performing a totally altruistic act was your goal and you have completed it, which thus betters you somehow, even though you are dead.
So, basically, what Rinku's idea of selfish is something that you do that does not harm you in any way. It can help people, it can hinder people, that part doesn't matter. What matters is that it advances you somehow.
If I'm wrong here, please tell me, Rinku.
_________________
UP DOWN UP DOWN LEFT LEFT RIGHT RIGHT A B START

[Pepsi Ranger]