"I did this for you." Is there such a thing ?

[aFireInside]

I personally find the question confusing . 

 

For example if i do something for my wife, i did it 

because i love our relationship, or i want to maintain 

our happiness. But there is always an "I". 

 

 

If I just give 100000 dollars to a homeless person 

and say "my action is selfless" . 

In reality I'm doing it because of my morals or believes. 

Or because it makes me feel good. 

 

 

In reality everything we do is because of our selves ? 

 

 

Thats where i stand. 

I just want feed back because I'm going to make a video 

on something related to this . 

[Cornellius]

I've been heavily bothered by that question in the past. To bring it up surely goes against the mythology in my family. During the last few phone calls my mother must have on more than twenty occasions told me "I have no expectations from you" for instance "I don't want you to act in a certain way, look I'm sending you your grandmother's pie, look do you want it or not? That's all I'm asking!" only to go nuts more and more as I kept saying I didn't want it, and back to calm and affectionate at the end of the call.

 

I think now that exposes the fact that it was 0% selfless will to share a pie for me to enjoy and 100% expectation from me to let my family into my heart. Interesting detail - I always felt wary about accepting food from my mother because I was afraid it might me poisoned. It was certainly against my principles because I had a dream where my mother assaulted me twice and murdered me with a gun, and as a person she is a real splitter.

 

Logically, no action ever taken on Earth has been selfless, although at some level I think people do make themselves think that they're selfless at times. It's been held as a virtue in many societies and still is. It's an idea that's possible to absorb and in the end, isn't the dominant culture one that makes a moral dichotomy out of lazy indulgence vs. self-sacrifice. Isn't the latter the high standard for at least men in society right now? That false self.

 

Do you have a Youtube channel?

[aFireInside]

Thanks for your response Cornellius.

I think the pie is a Trojan horse, into the walls of your city. 

​Yeah everything we do is because of us, after all we make the decisions. 

(even if a slave obeys a slave master, they are doing it because they prefer not be wiped or killed)

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do have a youtube channel I'm still experimenting on what to post. Its a how-to channel.

And I'm working on doing some videos that are like what i wrote above. 

 (i just started it)

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4J-tUe8X-Vf5aZGT9uQD7w

[cynicist]

To be entirely selfless is some weird religious concept. It doesn't even make sense taken literally. (When do I not have a self?) Humans are motivated by values, and everything we do is in relation to those values. On the other hand I think, "I did this for you", is a valid statement because you can do something special for someone you care about while also doing it for yourself at the same time, those aren't mutually exclusive. If I buy my wife a ring I can honestly say I did it to make her happy, I just can't say I did it to the exclusion of my own happiness. (since I'm deriving pleasure for myself from doing something for her) It just isn't rational to do things for others without considering your values, otherwise why would we even have values? 

[Cornellius]

To be entirely selfless is some weird religious concept. It doesn't even make sense taken literally. (When do I not have a self?) Humans are motivated by values, and everything we do is in relation to those values. On the other hand I think, "I did this for you", is a valid statement because you can do something special for someone you care about while also doing it for yourself at the same time, those aren't mutually exclusive. If I buy my wife a ring I can honestly say I did it to make her happy, I just can't say I did it to the exclusion of my own happiness. (since I'm deriving pleasure for myself from doing something for her) It just isn't rational to do things for others without considering your values, otherwise why would we even have values? 

 

New Oxford American Dictionary

for |fôr, fər| preposition1 in support of or in favor of (a person or policy): they voted for independence in a referendum.

2 affecting, with regard to, or in respect of (someone or something): she is responsible for the efficient running of their department | the demand for money.4 having (the thing mentioned) as a purpose or function: she is searching for enlightenment |the necessary tools for making a picture frame.

5 having (the thing mentioned) as a reason or cause: Aileen is proud of her family for their support | I could dance and sing for joy.

 

 

So it looks like the 2 first forms of the phrase "I did this for you" are valid and harmless. Can't say the same thing for 4 and 5, which are in my mind the culturally accepted forms. I mean how often do you hear someone say "I did this for you" meaning "I did this in your favor"? What people really mean by "I did this for you" isn't "I acted in your favor" but more like "I busted my ass sacrifying for your sake god dammit!" because "I did this/ for you" in that form is simply oxymoronic. So no "I did this for you" is not an altogether valid statement.

[PatrickC]

Yes, cynicist has kind of hinted at this already. Selflessness is of course a piece of propaganda we have all been subject too. Whether by teachers, parents or priests. The media love to laud over acts of bravery, but then berate those that are less brave because they most likely understood the danger. It is mostly a shaming tactic to get us to do something for others. So I'm always cautious around arguments that assume it to have any relevance. Ayn Rand very cleverly unpicked this vile piece of propganda, which she referred to as alturism, in both, 'Atlas Shrugged' and 'The Virtue of Selfishness'.

 

You often hear parents claiming to have unconditional love for their children. All the while expecting their children to act in ways that will make them happy. A selfless act is often said by a partner as some kind of claim to virtue. You see this all the time amongst leftists. They treat selflessness or alturism as a noble thing. All the while ignoring the violence that underwrites their ideology. It's all faux virtue of course, since no one can be 100% selfless.

[Cornellius]

Yes, cynicist has kind of hinted at this already. Selflessness is of course a piece of propaganda we have all been subject too. Whether by teachers, parents or priests. The media love to laud over acts of bravery, but then berate those that are less brave because they most likely understood the danger. It is mostly a shaming tactic to get us to do something for others. So I'm always cautious around arguments that assume it to have any relevance. Ayn Rand very cleverly unpicked this vile piece of propganda, which she referred to as alturism, in both, 'Atlas Shrugged' and 'The Virtue of Selfishness'.

 

You often hear parents claiming to have unconditional love for their children. All the while expecting their children to act in ways that will make them happy. A selfless act is often said by a partner as some kind of claim to virtue. You see this all the time amongst leftists. They treat selflessness or alturism as a noble thing. All the while ignoring the violence that underwrites their ideology. It's all faux virtue of course, since no one can be 100% selfless.

 

What about a yummy exception? Here's an action that is selfless.

 

When the kamikazee yells Allahu Akbar! then blows himself up, you can say he's a pretty selfless person as the shockwave is travelling towards people in a night club! Oh the altruism!

[PatrickC]

What about a yummy exception? Here's an action that is selfless.

 

When the kamikazee yells Allahu Akbar! then blows himself up, you can say he's a pretty selfless person as the shockwave is travelling towards people in a night club! Oh the altruism!

 

I'm not sure it is an exception. What about the 66 virgins or the honour amongst their islamic brethren. It's just another example of how selflessness just allows people to do the most heinous of crimes.

[Cornellius]

I'm not sure it is an exception. What about the 66 virgins or the honour amongst their islamic brethren. It's just another example of how selflessness just allows people to do the most heinous of crimes.

You think I was being serious? I don't think you're being very serious right now by the by.

[PatrickC]

You think I was being serious? I don't think you're being very serious right now by the by.

 

I'm wondering why you felt I was critcising you. If I misunderstood your irony, then it should be a little pause for some light laughter at my error.

[aFireInside]

I want to share something that i just recently came up across. 

 

 

I noticed that, my mother and father use this idea to guilt me. 

They also social engineer me into isolating myself. 

 

Like when scientist rings a bell and feeds the dog. They keep doing it,

until the dog salivates whenever it hears a bell. 

 

My parents used negative renforcment whenever i would

have pleasure, or go out. Till the point where all i did

was stay inside.   (they use to insult me in passive aggressive ways, so sneaky and slimy that i just realized this a few months ago)

 

Thats why i was asking about this...

I was making sure that they where using that phrase as a way to manipulate me.  

[cynicist]

What people really mean by "I did this for you" isn't "I acted in your favor" but more like "I busted my ass sacrifying for your sake god dammit!" because "I did this/ for you" in that form is simply oxymoronic.

 

I get your meaning, but I don't think it is oxymoronic. It's like an affirmation. To me, "I did this for you", makes sense as clarification in the event of a misunderstanding or a correction after someone implies that you acted purely in your own interest. I understand that people use it to mean, "I did this just for you", but that's not the only way to use that phrase.

 

 

Thats why i was asking about this...

I was making sure that they where using that phrase as a way to manipulate me.  

 

Can you put it into context? Or were you asking about the pie example? It sounded like you were already clear about that but if not then it was certainly manipulation. If she was honestly just asking if you wanted a pie then she wouldn't have "gone nuts" after you expressed that you didn't, unless she was expecting a particular answer or had some ulterior motive.

[cherapple]

It's up to the receiver of the action to decide whether it was really "for them." Did the receiving person ask for it? Did they really want it? Did the person claiming to act in the another person's interest ask about, or hear, what the other person wanted? If not, then they can make no claims to doing it for the other person. If yes, and they know without a doubt what the other person wants, then yes, there is such a thing as "I did it for you." But then it wouldn't need to be said. Only a person who wants to hide that they are acting in their own interest feels the need to say, "I did it for you."

[Kevin Beal]

If someone steals from me, is it selfless on my part? I don't have that rewarding feeling, and my actions (not locking up) resulted in a gain for them.

 

People who advocate democracy seem to think so.

[Guest Exceptionalist]

An action is selfless if there is not any emotional, idealistic and materialistic benefit for the person in particular. Those actions are likely to be suicidal in the long run.

[aeonicentity]

I think a more realistic defention is to perform an action primarally for the beneiciary and not for the benefactor. True selflessness is not when you have no self motivations, but rather when you consider the benefits to others before your own. While it is true that there is no action which exisits without personal benefit, but there are people and actions which prioritize others over self.

 

In summary, selflessness is in the state of mind of the benefactor, not the action its self.

[aFireInside]

I think that since we control our actions, and we first have to consult ourselfs before doing any action. 

 

By definition we are not selfless. 

 

 

Thats my conclusion. 

 

 

Even if i kill myself to save someone. 

I still did it because i choose and agreed to do it. ( i consulted the self) 

And it went with my moral/ideals at the moment . 

so our actions are not selfless because the self has to agree to the action first.. 

And the self is always present. so actions cannot be self less 

So yeah people can do things for you but they are not selfless. And allot of the times abusive people use this tactic to regain your trust. 

[Ancient Mariner]

This is a quote from an anthropology book that I read a few months ago. It's attributed to a person living in a Greenland tribe. I believe Levi Strauss has a similar saying: 

Up here we say that by gifts one makes slaves and by whips one makes dogs

 In my experience, you need to very careful when someone wants to do something for you "unselflessly". One of my uncles and my parents agreed to send me to live with him while I was going to college. My uncle ended up wanting to mold me after his own twisted and sick view of the world. I refused it implicitly by only coming back to his house to sleep. Until I stopped talking to him I never stopped hearing complains on how ungrateful I was. You can see another reference to it in the series "House of Cards" in Netflix. Kevin Spacey's character helps Corey Stoll's character to get out of a compromising situation. Since that point onwards Spacey owned Corey.

[aFireInside]

This is a quote from an anthropology book that I read a few months ago. It's attributed to a person living in a Greenland tribe. I believe Levi Strauss has a similar saying: 

 In my experience, you need to very careful when someone wants to do something for you "unselflessly". One of my uncles and my parents agreed to send me to live with him while I was going to college. My uncle ended up wanting to mold me after his own twisted and sick view of the world. I refused it implicitly by only coming back to his house to sleep. Until I stopped talking to him I never stopped hearing complains on how ungrateful I was. You can see another reference to it in the series "House of Cards" in Netflix. Kevin Spacey's character helps Corey Stoll's character to get out of a compromising situation. Since that point onwards Spacey owned Corey.

 

I never heard that quote thanks for sharing it. 

It makes sense to me . 

[dsayers]

I agree with the consensus that if somebody is saying that, it's likely they did NOT do it for the other.

 

As to the titular question: Sure there's such a thing. In the opening post, you observed that there's always something for the actor, but this can just be an effect of the action and not a motivation.