You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Case for "Enlightened Self-interest" on Steem /Help me fill up the @openmic reward pool this week/
I really dont see how your example applies here.
The motivation behind your choices, or non-choices is completely unimportant here.
Its important to stay on topic.
By robbing a bank, you could say you act in your selfish self interest. By acting in such a way you are creating a negative effect on society, if "more or all" (as stated in the post) act in such a way it would lead to societal collapse.
By not robbing a bank on the other hand you arent acting at all.
Your non-choices have no bearing on anything in this example.
Its all always about self interest, but there is a very clear distinction between enlightened self interest and the other.
Motivation is completely unimportant here. The end result is.
Hmm. Now I'm further confused.
We behave due to our motives. That seemed to be what your whole post was about: "enlightened self-interest". However one defines this, it is, conceptually, a question of motivation. No?
And if you say "the end result is what's important", this means that the end result is your motivation. No?
I agree there is often a clear distinction between "enlightened self interest" and "unenlightened self-inerest" (though there may be some overlap between the two). I was simply pointing out that I think it's problematic to define "enlightened self interest" as being motivated by a group's interest rather than the interest of the individual making the value judgment. There are other examples of ethics which hold the group's value as paramount - enlightened self interest is just not one of them.