It seems that one of the major differences between Sophist views and Socratic views are their take on "winning" and selfishness. In class, we have criticized the sophists for being conceited and materialistic, because of their idea of living the good life is "winning" and being successful. The Socratic view is very similar, only its idea of sucess is more focused on the benifit of the soul. Since the Sophists were relativists, meaning that they believed the determinatition of what is "good" or "evil" depends on the individual, this concept could be extended to individuals who seek moral success as a means of personall success by assisting others and doing good, just as Socraties suggested.
A theory that has become semi-popular in the world of human nature is that we, as humans, act completely out of selfishness (this was brought to mind by the Sophist view on "winning" one's own game of life). The first reaction people have to this theory is that it is unbelieveable, because so many people do charity work, and other things to benifit fellow human beings. To argue this, one might say that humans do charity work to feel better about themselves. If this were the case, then it might also be said that people do apparently selfless things in a selfish effort to be selfless. And with so many people believing in religions that promise afterlife to "good" and "selfless" souls, who would not wan't to appear selfless, just in case. In the end, doesn't it all seems to come down to personal success? Its a survival, and philosophical instinct. We don't like to think of ourselves as selfish creatures, but it doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, especially for those whose personal goals involve being good, caring, intelligent human beings.
Does this any sense? Do you think humans are capable of completely selfless acts? Why/ why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I personally think that the term "selfless act" is a little bit of an oxymoron, for in order to perform an act of kindness, you have to want to help that person / thing in need.
ReplyDeleteWhen it really comes down to it, I feel like the term "selfless act" causes more argument than is needed on the subject, for why should it be questioned in the first plac wether or not you were being selfish to help someone? In the end if you have actually been a help, that is all the matters, you shouldn't need a proof of purchase to make you feel like a better person.
In the end its almost better that the person you have helped doesn't even know that you have been there to help them, for it means that you are just genuinely good, and for a splinter of time you get to be someone's guardian angel
Do you agree?