No, that's what me and @Eden were discussing

" the word is used more broadly to refer to behavior that benefits others, regardless of its motive"

what's your actual point then

that you disagree with said source's preamble?

???

Dude

Are you legitimately retarded?

Plato was a pedophile anyways. Basically unless plhad has a basement full of little boys that he stuffs on the regular he's just an autistic poser

I didn't say I agree with the info of that link, I am trying to explain to you why discussing altruism isn't semantics

Now kill that strawman, bury it, and face me

Coward

Even Eden has disavowed that the conversation was about altruism as philosophy

It was just you furiously masturbating you peabrain

Altruism is a giant ass school of philosophy

Lmao

Which again, going on about shit nobody cares about and then getting bent out of shape when people don't want to engage it is a Hallmark of autistic behavior

> @Greasy That would be true if it were just a word and not a school of philosophy
@phadreus

Ninja is a pedophile

It is a word

disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.

That statement has way more meaning than you think

@Greasy

With great understanding comes little passions.

@Eden Yeah, but it's also a school of philosophy

It is a word

Christ

I wasnt arguing a dictionary definition

And would never

I fucking hate semantics

Is this guy really putting the definition ahead of reality?

Definitions are inherently flawed

By design

Because that's how English works

No, they are just popularly attributed , the school of philosophy is just the thought exercises around the word.

Arguing them is the epitome of linguistic retardation

You misunderstand the whole basis of philosophy

point is, your source material there has fascinating and insightful philosophical questions such as "does altruism exist" and "does egoism exist" and it concludes that yes, it's alright to care about other people, and yes, sometimes you shouldn't be altruistic. how fucking wonderful. naturally many people have wasted years of study on just this wishy washy semantic bullshit to come to a common sense answer.

Using definitions in arguments is even a fallacy

It isn't.

Definitions are the basis of an argument. Words without meaning yields arguments without meaning.