Person A doesn't help others because they want all the money for themselves and not share

How is that bad?

It provides motive for others to be productive members of society

Person B needs a few bucks for food after getting layed off and is looking for work, misses the bus for the job interview and doesn't get the job

I get the empathy. But the couple bucks in this situation doesn't address why person B had all these bad things happen to them.

Selfishness harms others. If everyone is selfish it's going to harm you. Selfishness can be great in the short term for the individual, but if too many people are selfish society weakens.

Are you familiar with the tragedy of the commons?

Go on, I am unfamiliar in how you can say beyond a doubt that it harms.

Well if people take selfishness to its logical extreme, then there's no way to preserve personal liberty, as sooner or later you're goign to be motivated to infringe on others liberties based on your own wnats

This is why we have laws

Well laws can also be perverted to serve the needs of the most powerful selfish people.

Are you being purposefully obtuse on not understanding why selfishness can be bad in order to make an argument, or do you really not believe that it can be bad?

Perverting the laws is a selfish act. So I get that point.

@Schedrevka I see multiple lines of thinking. And am currently exploring the idea of whether it is logical to be 100% selfish.

It is never logical to take a 100% approach, the reason is that not all situations can be helped by one responce

How do you determine 100% selfishness? Is helping an old lady across the street selfish if you think it might improve your standing with an onlooker?

Yeah you want a "critical mass" where people are motivated to great ambitions that they might not be in a 100% egalitarian society

I agree, but by examining the 100% approach and seeing its flaws. We can use that as a basis to help find an optimum %

But not to the point whre the weak have no personal liberty

@Schedrevka if this is your goals this would be a selfish act

I don't believe there is an optimum %. It's always going to be contextual. Society is a chaotic system. And society changes, and what works in one culture won't work in another.

Ok, by examining its flaws we can methodically and consciously understand where selflessness is required for the greater benefit

I don't think we can quantify that sort of thing. It's far too complicated. And what would the end goal be? Writing a rule book and hoping people follow it?

There's a lot of criticism already to study on where the principles of Kant, Betham, Mill, etc break down.

I think it would be perfectly selfish to empower a government that reduced/eliminated the risk of individuals or groups perverting the laws for their own selfish behavior

Yes, it would be selfish to force others to forgo their own selfishness.

It would also be oppressive.

On an individual basis. Determining this for myself will let me know I am acting in both my and societies best interests

I think rather than trying to assign selfishness values to each action you should instead consider how your actions align with the principles you hold most dear, and how they will affect the world

How would preventing individuals and groups from changing law to suit benefit only their group be oppressive?

I suppose there's different kinds of selfishness. Like "I want to have lots of sex because it makes me feel good, regardless of the consequences," vs "I want my name to be in history books because of my contributions to western civilization."

Sorry, I misread that part.

True, everyone has motivation. Many selfless acts are invariably motivated by selfish desires.

But by contrast there are those that act selfessly out of selfless desires, EG the anual gold coin brigade. Persons unknown slip $50 or $100 dollar gold coins into Salvation Army kettles each year to the tune of thousands of dollars and are know only to god.

Are acts done to make yourself feel good really selfless though?

Hmm yes

In the end does it matter when the result is the same?

I think the act itself is selfless but the motivation can only be selfish

When I offer to make my Mom a cup of tea it doesn't make me feel good, and I'm not thinking about how she may reward me. In my head I'm going "ugghhh I don't want to do this". But I do it anyway because I know how much she's done for me and it's the right thing to do.

Many people do have selfish motivations, but not all. And even if they do I don't see that as such a bad thing when it results in good for others.

Not really, it satifies nothing for the people who are part of the gold coin brigade. It cost them money and they get nothing in return, no praise, no validation, no thank yous,

So acts done due because of social obligations are selflessly motivated. Hmm