• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Selfless Acts

  • Thread starter Anonym0uz Bitch
  • Start date
A

Anonym0uz Bitch

Guest
Wikipedia isnt a very reliable source, since people can just edit everything ya know.
 
A

Anonym0uz Bitch

Guest
Not really, seeing as how a 9 year old cannot edit a book made by a doctor, so no it cannot be applied to any form of documenation. Any user can edit Wikipedia.
 

Kos4Evr

Registered Member
No, 8 year olds cannot edit any form of docementation but a government for example could edit any form of literature to support them. No documentation is written in stone so all are open to being edited.
 
A

Anonym0uz Bitch

Guest
When it comes to Wikipedia anyone can edit it, which is my point, it is A LOT more difficult to edit an actual document then something on a website.
 

Kos4Evr

Registered Member
I looked up Altruism and found this: http://www.altruists.org/about/altruism/

According to this the definition and examples are not accurate. You stated the following:
Piccolo said:
How many people believe that you a person can perform a selfless act, without any reward, and reward also counts as feeling good after helping someone, etc. Lets say you save someone, and you feel good about it later, that would disqualify you from being selfless. This is also known as Altruism.
According to that sight's definition it says nothing about getting a reward. It says doing things for the good of others. That really isn't so hard to do and makes the concept of being selfless far from impossible. It also tends to invalidate a great deal of what you said in this thread.
 
A

Anonym0uz Bitch

Guest
That would be one definition, in my Social Psychology book it is listed as "The desire to help another person even if it involves cost to the helper, with no reward expected." My stance is that it cannot be achieved because feeling good about the act someone commits is in itself a reward. You are also going by a website listed as an organization, should I go to the people at www.godhatesfags.com, and go by their definitions?
 

Kos4Evr

Registered Member
Well technically selfless is anything that is not selfish or self serving. Your definition discounts a lot of things that are in fact selfless and therefore should be viewed as incorrect. It is is still selfless if you are rewarded for doing an action that would bring you no gain at the time you did it.

I guess what I am trying to say if your definition must be incorrect because it excludes anything that could be a correct answer leaving you with only incorrect answers.
 
A

Anonym0uz Bitch

Guest
That is how you believe on the matter, myself, and evidently quite a few others, believe that it is impossible to commit a truly selfless act, due to the reason I've listed countless times, regardless of your motivation beforehand, we are talking about how you feel afterwards. You are also telling a college textbook that was writtin by three Psychology Professors that their definition is wrong. It does bring you gain if you feel good about doing something good right after you have done it, that is self-satisfaction.
 

Kos4Evr

Registered Member
A book cannot be wrong, it is only a book and it contains what is written in it. However it would not be out of the question the writer (or in this case writers) as even though the 3 were in agreement, that does not automatically make them right either. It doesn't take a smart man to publish a book and a degree does not mean that some one is smart in all aspects even in their own fied of study.
 
Top