PDLP Chapter 1583 Selfishness
Chapter 1583 Selfishness
"Pingping, Jingjing, for me, your safety is the most important thing. As long as I can guarantee your safety, I am willing to pay any price. That's why what I said just now sounds so inconsistent."
Zhao Chaogang explained that he clearly knew why Li Liping and Liu Jingjing had such puzzled expressions on their faces. It was all because of the inconsistency in his words. Therefore, in order to explain clearly, Zhao Chaogang confessed the reason directly .
Zhao Chaogang's words sound very selfish. As long as Li Liping and Liu Jingjing are safe, Zhao Chaogang doesn't care about everything else. These words are selfish, but this is also a reasonable thing. The world is selfish, but selfish To varying degrees.
Selfish, 'self' refers to oneself; 'selfish' refers to self. The concept of "selfishness" is usually contained in "self-centeredness".The biggest difference between the two is that selfishness means that when individuals face conflicts between their own interests and those of the other party, they will ignore the other party’s losses and focus on satisfying their own interests; in addition, selfish people are usually aware that their actions may damage others while performing selfish behaviors. and the interests of others, but still use all means according to their own interests.
Selfishness has existed since ancient times.During the Warring States Period, there was a beautiful man Zou Ji in the state of Qi. One day, another handsome man Xu Gong came to visit. After Xu Gong left, Zou Ji asked his wife, concubine, and guest respectively which one was more handsome, he or Xu Gong. Say Zou Ji is good-looking.Zou Ji knew that Xu Gong was more handsome than himself. After thinking alone, he thought that his wife was partial to him, the concubine was afraid of him, and the guest was asking for him. They were not telling the truth.It is because they all have selfish distractions.
Therefore, "Book? Zhou Guan" put forward the idea of "destroying private interests with the public", and Mr. Sun ===Zhong===Shan also put forward the idea of "the world is for the public".
Selfish.It is a frequently used concept.A concept is not easy to define because it is often used by people.As a research, how can it be defined more scientifically to summarize all its essential characteristics?
In his book "New Synthesis", American scholar Wilson even described the gene, the most basic unit of life, as "selfish".To extend the meaning of Wilson's use of the concept of "selfishness", a grass competes with another grass for food, a bird eats a worm, a cat eats a mouse, a dog competes with another dog for a bone, and a human eats pork. , eat grains.This is all a manifestation of "selfishness".
Although Wilson also admits that genes are neither conscious nor emotional.In fact, Wilson refers to the "objective behavior" of any organism that is beneficial to itself and at the expense of other organisms as "selfishness".
In what sense Wilson uses the concept of selfishness is his own business, but for the convenience of research, it is limited to the use of the concept of selfishness in the relationship between people in human society.
Selfishness, as one of the attributes of human beings, as a broad and complex social phenomenon, can be manifested in the objective behavior of human beings.It can also be manifested as human subjective consciousness, concept, and motivation.
Because of the unity of human consciousness and behavior, selfishness can refer to both behavior and concept; and because human behavior and consciousness may be disconnected, separation occurs in space and time, or appears in the form of contradictions.It can also refer to behavior or idea alone.So, what is the definition of selfishness in terms of subjective consciousness?Or is it better to define selfishness in terms of objective behavior?As long as it is something, it will be selfish.
Some people focus on defining selfishness from the perspective of objective behavior and its effects, and believe that "selfishness refers to the behavior that people satisfy their own interests at the expense of harming the interests of others and society."In other words, selfishness is an objective behavior that benefits oneself at the expense of others.Call this definition "the objective definition of selfish behavior."
This definition is in line with people's habit of emphasizing behavioral effects in moral evaluation.Moreover, many people use the concept of selfishness in the sense of acting at the expense of others on many occasions.but.This definition is far from simple.
First, according to the definition, a person can be called selfish only when he actually acts at the expense of others.People are not selfish if they do not behave in ways that benefit themselves at the expense of others.
However, as we all know, just as a person may have the consciousness and motivation of committing a crime, but it does not necessarily show criminal behavior in fact, just as a person has the consciousness of harming others and benefiting himself, it does not necessarily manifest the behavior of harming others and benefiting himself in fact.
This is because: [-]. Motivation and awareness guide the generation of behavior, and there is still a process in between.One motivation, consciousness, may have changed or disappeared before the process is complete, replaced by another consciousness, motivation;
[-]. A kind of motivation and consciousness may still exist, but due to the constraints of the external environment or the suppression of another consciousness and motivation, this consciousness and motivation temporarily do not guide the generation of behavior and become dormant.Therefore, a person does not exhibit the behavior of harming others and benefiting himself, but this does not mean that he must not have the consciousness and motivation of harming others and benefiting himself.
Because the definition of objective behavior does not include such a situation, when explaining some phenomena, it appears blunt and far-fetched.
For example, someone who did not act selfishly at the expense of others in one matter, but acted selfishly at the expense of others in another matter.According to the definition of objective behavior, it can only be explained in this way: he has changed from unselfish to selfish.
But in fact, there are two situations here: one is that this change in objective behavior is the result of a corresponding change in motivation and consciousness; the other is that although the behavior changes, the motivation has not changed, and the motivation has always existed and is continuous.It is reasonable to interpret the first case according to the definition of objective behavior, but it is obviously inappropriate to explain the second case.
Secondly, if the concept of selfishness is used in the strict sense of "benefiting others at the expense of others", then when someone dies and refuses to help or refuses to be saved, such behavior cannot be called selfish.Because the actor neither harms nor benefits himself, and in fact, without exception, people call this kind of behavior selfish, and such actors are called selfish people.
More importantly, when the objective effect of human behavior is self-interested and beneficial to others (reciprocity), is human being selfish?According to the definition of objective behavior, it cannot be called selfishness.
The objective behavioral effect of self-interest and benefit to others is often the result of the subjective motivation of "for me" (of course there are other situations).When someone implements behaviors that are objectively beneficial to others and society, the "altruist" is likely to obtain corresponding rewards from others and society. "His good behavior is a wily act. In essence, it is for the benefit of himself and his relatives." The concept and motivation are selfish.
Precisely because it is "for the benefit of myself and my relatives", so.If his good behavior (altruism) does not enable him to obtain the corresponding reward from the other party, or less than the corresponding reward he thinks.Then it can be expected that his good behavior will disappear or decrease, and if he can get the corresponding reward, his good behavior will continue to perform.
Although it is inconvenient to call this type of behavior selfish in a static sense only from the perspective of the behavioral effect (self-interest and benefit to others), if we look at it from the perspective of subjective consciousness and motivation in a dynamic sense.There is a good reason to call it selfish.
From this point of view, although selfishness is defined only from the aspect of objective behavior, although the unity of behavior motivation is taken into account, it does not summarize all the concepts and behaviors of people using the concept of selfishness because of the lack of attention to the contradiction and possibility of disconnection. Connotations, therefore, are quite limited.
What is the definition of selfishness in terms of subjective consciousness and motivation?
Undoubtedly, there are grounds for defining selfishness from the perspective of subjective consciousness: [-]. Only human beings have distinct consciousness (of course in a relative sense), so it is defined from the perspective of subjective consciousness.Human selfishness can be well distinguished from the "selfishness" (instinct) of other animals.Moreover, this is in line with the purpose of studying selfishness limited to human beings;
Second, define selfishness from the perspective of subjective consciousness and motivation, so as to understand selfishness and people from a dynamic perspective.thereby avoiding the limitations of objective behavior definitions;
[-]. Motivation and consciousness are more powerful than behavior itself. The logic is: usually, human behavior is always conscious behavior of human beings.If consciousness and motivation can be truly eliminated, then behavior itself can be eliminated at the same time.But the elimination of behavior does not mean the elimination of consciousness and motivation.And as long as the motivation and consciousness still exist, it can reproduce the behavior that has been eliminated.
Therefore, selfishness is defined as: when a person has an interest relationship with others or the society, he first considers his own interests more, and when a person thinks that his own interests do not conflict with others, this motivation to consider his own interests It can guide behaviors that are objectively beneficial to others and self; when people think that their own interests are in conflict with the interests of others and the society, this motivation to consider their own interests is manifested as sacrificing the interests of others and society to maintain and develop their own interests the behavior of.
Defining selfishness in this way may still not capture all the essential features of people's use of the concept.But one thing is certain, the concept of selfishness must be grasped in a multi-angle, multi-level and dynamic way.For this reason, it is necessary to combine the research on people's subjective consciousness, motivation and objective behavior.
As psychologists say, "Every behavior of human beings is based on conditions that are beneficial to themselves, otherwise there will be no motivation at all."
Some people may disagree with this point of view and think that there are still selfless people.Yes, altruistic behavior is selfless, and self-sacrifice is also selfless. Maybe you will say: "For the person concerned, all behaviors are selfish. Although they are not material selfishness, they are spiritual selfishness." You are right. From the actor's point of view, he really wants the other party to be good, and he does altruistic behaviors to satisfy his own wishes, but these are all subjective thoughts of the actor, and the public doesn't care about these at all, they only care about what they have already done. The objective fact of the occurrence is that the actor has already performed an altruistic behavior, and his behavior is selfless.
Things that are entangled in the subjective are idealistic, and returning to the objective is the kingly way, so it cannot be said that human nature is selfish.
Selfishness exists, and selflessness also exists. Here is a way to overcome selfishness: set a lofty ideal and a great goal for yourself, let yourself consider long-term interests in everything, and let yourself be dismissive of immediate interests.
There are two poles of human interests, one is the interests of individuals, the other is the interests of the entire human race.Therefore, selfishness and selflessness can be divided into two poles. One pole is the concept and behavior for the benefit of a single person, which can be called "absolute selfishness;" the other pole is the behavior and concept for the benefit of all mankind, which can be called "absolute selfishness". Selflessness." In the "middle ground" between the two extremes, those concepts and behaviors that are for the interests of friends, families, groups, factions, places, nations, and countries can be called selfless or selfish.It all depends on what kind of interest relationship is used as a reference.Just because public and private are relative, they can be divided into levels.Selfishness can also be divided into levels, which is the second meaning of the relativity of selfishness.
Example: Mother for the benefit of her son.You can sacrifice everything about yourself, even if your son's behavior is antisocial.From the perspective of the interest relationship between mother and son, the mother is selfless, but from the perspective of the interest relationship between mother and son, society and others, the mother is selfish.
Recognizing the relativity of selfishness has very important implications for answering the question whether selfishness is the existence of human beings or a product of human development to a certain stage.
One theory holds that people in ancient societies (early and middle primitive societies) were not selfish.Since the level of productivity determines the public ownership of the means of production and common labor, individual interests are always dissolved in collective interests.
Individual members living in this era have no personal interests at all, and always put collective interests above personal interests.
Individuals are willing to sacrifice themselves for the good of the group or the good of other members.However, thinkers and theorists who hold this theory use what they have learned about the historical knowledge of this era to tell people that groups (clans, tribes, and tribal alliances) living in this era will also compete for hunting grounds, Conflicts in pastoral areas, etc., that is.On the one hand, there is no conflict of interest between individuals within a group, but on the other hand, there is a conflict of interest between groups.How to explain the two different phenomena?
Question: There is no "for me" conflict of interest within a group, but there is a "for us" conflict of interest between groups.
Assumptions must be "for my" (individual) interests to be called "selfish". "For our" (group) interests cannot be called selfish, or can only be called "selfless", then.When individual members of fascist groups in modern society are willing to sacrifice their personal lives for the benefit of their group, (such as the kamikaze players in Little Japan) can't these fascists be called selfish?or.Must they be called altruistic people?
The above phenomenon can be well explained by the relativity of selfishness, as far as the interest relationship between the individual and the group is concerned.It is selfless to sacrifice oneself for the benefit of the group; as far as the interest relationship between the individual and the group is concerned, this individual behavior is also selfish.
Not only is "for me" selfish, but "for us" can be selfish as well.
It is precisely because of this that concepts such as "group self-interest" and "national self-interest" can be used.
If the above analysis is tenable, then, even if there were no personal interests and conflicts of interest in the ancient groups (this issue will be discussed later), only from the conflict of interests between groups, selfishness is inherent in ancient times, not in development. products at a certain stage.
The interests of any individual, group and others or another group always have both real unity and real contradiction.
The reason for the unity is that any individual or group, when cooperating with others or other groups, has the realistic possibility of gaining greater benefits than when they act alone.Furthermore, the reality of obtaining greater benefits may be based on the objective basis of the superiority of the division of labor and the simple sum of the power of the whole being greater than the power of the parts.
Knowing this is the key to understanding how selfishness can lead people to cooperate and achieve the objective effect of benefiting both self and others (reciprocity).
The reason why it is contradictory lies in the fact that people's sexual impulses, greed, and the scarcity of relative people's physical (physical and social) wealth and interests are constant, and this physiological and social desire Not always effectively suppressed.Therefore, conflicts are inevitable.
Mahatma Gandhi said: "according to everyone's needs, things are enough, but according to everyone's greed, it is not enough." socially motivated impulses.
For example: As far as personal physical needs are concerned, each person has several pairs of shoes to wear, which can protect the feet, facilitate walking, and can be replaced. Shoes are enough, but if wearing shoes is for the pursuit of a beautiful spiritual enjoyment, it is for To show that one's social status is superior to others is to be like Mrs. Ma-Koss in the monkey country, who is not enough to own three thousand pairs of shoes.
Since people's interests are unified, then, act according to the principle of unity of interests, start from the interests of oneself or the group, use altruism as a means, and finally achieve the goal of self-interest, and act and guide with the objective effect of self-interest and altruism The idea that this behavior produces.I call it "reasonable selfishness".
Human interests are both contradictory, then.Acting according to the principle of contradiction is not only based on the interests of oneself or the group.And the behavior that harms and sacrifices the interests of others and the society as a means to finally achieve the effect of harming others and the concept that guides this kind of behavior is called "malignant selfishness".
Human interests can be divided into short-term interests and long-term interests.Correspondingly, human selfishness can be divided into "near selfishness" and "far selfishness".Consciousness and behavior for the short-term interests of individuals or groups can be called near selfishness; in contrast, consciousness and behaviors for the long-term interests of individuals or groups can be regarded as far selfishness.
One of the most important reasons for people's cleverness and cunning, and the complexity of their interests.That is, people can sacrifice immediate interests for long-term interests.
People pursue the greatest benefit, but this greatest benefit is from the overall and long-term perspective, and the acquisition of the overall and long-term greatest benefit often requires the sacrifice of immediate and partial interests.
The so-called "if you want to take it, you must first give it; if you want to take it with plums, you must first throw it at a peach."In order to benefit oneself, people can benefit others first, and in order to benefit themselves at the expense of others.People can also be altruistic first, these two types of behaviors, from a static sense, from one behavior.Even looking at a series of behaviors, it is very easy to be confused with "selfless altruism".
So, far from the notion of selfishness.It is very important to grasp and understand people's interest relationship in a dynamic sense.
Let everyone look at the "cake theory": in terms of a cake that has been produced.It must be that the more the capitalists get, the less the workers get; and vice versa.The more the workers get, the less the capitalists get. This cannot be changed by anyone's will.However, the distribution of this ration of cake can cause a change in the quantity of the next cake produced.
The capitalist has learned through repeated practice that if he distributes too much of the existing cake and the workers too little, it will dampen the enthusiasm of the workers for this distribution, and the next cake may be produced well. Smaller, which means that the next distribution of the cake, if the capitalists do not get less than the last time, at least it is difficult to get more.
On the contrary, if he distributes relatively less this time and distributes relatively more to the workers, since the production enthusiasm of the workers is stimulated, the next time the cake will be produced bigger, in this way, the workers may get more than the last time, and the capitalists will also Get more.
People pursue the greatest benefit, while capitalists pursue the total profit of the total product. He understands "five out of ten gets five", but he understands "two out of four gets eight" even more.
Therefore, instead of saying that capitalists have changed from selfishness to less selfishness, it is better to say that capitalists have changed from near selfishness to far selfishness.
Of course, the above analysis omitted some things, and the actual situation is far more complicated, but the basic truth is the same.The view that the interests of workers and capitalists are fundamentally opposed can only make sense in a static sense, that is, the distribution of quantitative pies.In a dynamic sense, from the distribution of a series of cakes, it is better to say that the interests of workers and capitalists are unified.
If the interests of capitalists and workers are only contradictory but not unified, it is absolutely impossible for the capitalist system to exist for hundreds of years and still develop.
Corresponding to the division of selfishness is the division of human morality: as mentioned earlier, human moral behavior and concepts can be roughly divided into three types, a. self-interest at the expense of others, b. self-interest and benefit to others, c. self-denial and benefit to others. In terms of the relative amount of the three different morals, concepts and behaviors, people can be divided into three types morally, a. vicious selfishness; b. reasonable selfishness; c. impartiality and selflessness.
Malignant selfish people tend to behave at the expense of others and benefit themselves. People who hold the concept of malignant selfishness not only consider their own interests first, but also often try to seize the interests of others to satisfy their own personal interests.When they get the chance, they do it.From petty theft and fraud, to murder and robbery, to robbery.
They have less sympathy and conscience. In their philosophy of life, people are like wolves and wolves, but in the real world, "there are more wolves and less meat". Therefore, there is only one rule: the weak eat the strong.The so-called conscience and morality are all fooling people.
Although in many cases, they also say these beautiful and wonderful words, but it is just a cover, for the purpose of defrauding and plundering the interests of others and society more cleverly and conveniently.
If evil selfish people do not plunder or infringe on the interests of others or society, it is often because of the fear of others and the strong social power. They are afraid that "if they can't steal the chicken, they will be interrupted instead." They abide by moral laws.But the ass obeys the whip.
Malignant selfish people are the bane of society, generally.They are a minority in society.
Reasonably selfish people in social life, the first consideration is their own interests. "Whether it can bring me benefits" is the starting point of most of their actions.However, compared with malignant selfish people, reasonable selfish people are generally opposed to self-interest at the expense of others, "live for themselves and let others live." They demand their own interests, but are often willing to use legitimate means (that is, allowed by general moral standards) to satisfy them.
Compared with malignant selfish people, they have more compassion and conscience, and are more likely to show altruistic behavior; but compared with selfless people, they are less willing to make sacrifices for others and society.Reasonably selfish people are "good people" in the ordinary sense.But it is generally not "sublime".
Rationally selfish people are the majority, or even the vast majority, of society, and they are the basic factors of social stability.
Because they account for the largest proportion, and they are also the biggest force driving society forward.
Selfless people show more altruistic behaviors and have noble morals.It is easier for them to make sacrifices for the benefit of the country and the people.Many of them, for the benefit of others, the country, and the nation, sacrificed their most precious human lives, and their names will go down in history and shine forever.
As long as humans don't all go crazy.The selfless will forever occupy the highest moral seat in human history, they are immortal.
Unfortunately, so far, the altruistic people have not been able to occupy the majority in human society.They excel in a sense precisely because they are few.Although human beings have consumed countless manpower and material resources in order to call for emulation with such people.But it still doesn't make them a "majority" - which may be enough in itself.
A purely empirical description of three types of people.It is undoubtedly very rough, but the general outline should not be wrong.
It should be noted that none of the three types of people is "pure".There is neither purely evil selfishness, nor purely rational selfishness or impartiality.
If people can indeed transform themselves and be transformed by the environment, then as individuals, they must have the three possibilities of becoming viciously selfish, rationally selfish, or impartial.
Therefore, it is undeniable that the three types of people are not fixed, can transform into each other and in fact transform into each other.A person who used to be a thief can also be transformed into a hero who sacrificed himself for the benefit of others and society; some "old revolutionaries" who risked their lives to fight for the interests of the people can also be transformed into great ——Corruption-corruption-criminal, or becoming the "official-lord" of the fish and meat people, this does not need to be discussed in detail, experience has repeatedly proved this point.
Next, let's talk specifically about the point that there are no purely disinterested people.
The reason I bring this up is because some people have created and continue to create a myth that there is a kind of people who have reached such a moral state that they always use the interests of others, the people-people, in every situation. ---Profit --- profit is the most important thing, no matter when and where, they would rather sacrifice their own interests to safeguard the interests of others and the people.
They don't seek fame or profit, they are wholeheartedly for the revolution -- life, and for the people -- the people.The happiness of others, the people, and the liberation of human beings are the only goals of their lives.In short, these people have no "personal self-interest" at all, and are purely selfless.
This kind of point of view, in addition to thinking that it misstates political agitation slogans as an objective fact, can only be regarded as an out-and-out myth-because it can't find any facts to prove it. It cannot be proved by any logical analysis.
Theorists who hold this point of view, when they search through human history and search every corner of the world, can they find any one who would rather sacrifice his own interests and even his life to meet the needs and happiness of others under any circumstances? people?
The ability of human beings as individuals to exist in the relationship between human beings lies in the fact that human beings exist for themselves.For an individual, pure existence for others essentially negates the necessity and possibility of human existence as an individual.
If there is no desire, there will be no possession of wealth, so there is no such thing as selfishness; if there is no high-level consciousness that is unique to human beings, then "human selfishness" is no different from the "selfishness" of other creatures; Because human desires are infinitely many, (like the air) there will be no question of selfishness or not, because then it will rule out whether to occupy more or less, occupy first or occupy later.It is necessary for me to occupy or others to occupy; if it is not in an interest relationship with others or other groups, it does not matter whether it is selfish or not.
Human psychology can be divided into two levels: physiological and social.The former is the foundation, and the latter is the extension and development of the former.Physiology is based on the instinct of individual survival and race continuation.It is the result of life itself, a natural attribute.
Socialism is based on the development and enjoyment needs of individuals and groups, and is a social attribute.Social development is closely related to the level of human productivity and the development of culture.
In a certain sense, social development can be regarded as determined by the development of productive forces and culture.
Although the social attributes of human beings are a sign that humans are different from or superior to other animals, it is inconceivable to create and exist without natural attributes and social attributes.
Just as if there is no sexual instinct, it is absolutely impossible to produce the love between a man and a woman unique to human beings, so in this sense, natural attributes are the more essential things of human beings.Moreover, social attributes do not generally negate natural attributes.
Compare selfishness (egoism) to a rushing river.It is compared to the powerful atomic energy.
Big rivers can provide drinking water for human beings, facilitate transportation, irrigate fertile fields, generate electricity, etc., and bring various benefits to human beings. The source of human civilization is all closely related to rivers. It can be said that there are no rivers.There are no humans.
However, it is it that has caused many disasters to mankind.
When it floods, it breaks the dams.It inundates good fields, houses, livestock, and even swallows people, destroying everything it can.
Atomic energy can provide enormous energy for human beings.It can serve the various causes of mankind, but the atomic bomb is lurking to destroy the earth.The Great Danger of Burying Humanity!
The key to the problem is the control and control of human beings.
Is there an attempt to destroy the river because of the disaster it has caused to humans?Are you refusing to apply this great invention because of the potential great danger of atomic energy?The wise realist would answer this: eliminate or control the catastrophes of rivers and atomic energy, and preserve and exploit their superiority.
As the saying goes.This is the reason why children are not thrown out with dirty water.
The responsibility of human beings and the development of civilization do not lie in eliminating selfishness, but in rationally cultivating, guiding, and controlling selfishness, and giving full play to the beneficial role of selfishness, the deep-seated innate psychological power of human society, so as to continuously promote the advancement of society and constantly perfect human beings.What needs to be controlled and eliminated is vicious selfishness, and those who try to negate selfishness indiscriminately are just like fools who throw out children with dirty water.They repeatedly emphasized: For me and for us, it is always possible to disregard and harm others.
This statement is not bad.Just as long as rivers exist, people may drown, and as long as modern means of transportation exist, people may die in traffic accidents. As long as selfishness exists, there may be objective effects of harming others and benefiting oneself.
However, due to human control, it is possible for rivers not to drown people, and it is also possible for people not to die in traffic accidents, and selfishness may not bring about the objective effect of harming others and benefiting oneself. He did not see the realistic possibility that the selfishness determined by the unity of human interests can lead to the objective effect of self-interest and benefit to others.
Yes, observing real life, every objective behavior that harms others and benefits oneself, if traced to the root cause, is nothing but the result of "selfishness".However, this does not mean that all selfishness guides selfish behavior at the expense of others.
People may rely on their own reason, conscience, and moral restraint, as well as the control and influence of the external environment, to restrain selfishness within a reasonable range, so as to achieve the objective effect of benefiting themselves and others.
It is necessary to understand and remember the basic fact that 'people's interests and the interests of others have a realistic and objective unity', but those who deny general selfishness only pay attention to and emphasize the connection between general selfishness and malignant selfishness, just like paying attention to When it comes to rivers, atomic energy is the same as their potential transformation into disasters for humans, but unfortunately, the difference between the two is ignored, and human beings can control and eliminate the disasters they bring and use their superiority.Therefore, it is one-sided and wrong, and it does not work in reality.
One of the specific conclusions——Economy If it is true that people generally consider their own or the group's interests first, then the economic system should conform to this reality.When a person conducts economic activities, his economic activities should be closely linked with his material interests.The hook is reflected in two aspects: when a person's work is better and more effective than others, he should make more profits; when his work is poor, he should make less profit, or no profit, or even lose money.
For this point, people have become more sober from the painful lesson of the failure of the "big pot rice experiment" in which hundreds of millions of people participated, and the emergence of reforms is a clear proof.
The second specific conclusion-how to make people hold power to serve the public interest well while preventing him from using the power in his hands to harm the public interest is one of the core issues of political science, and it is also the basis of all reasonable politics. system must be addressed.
If everyone has selfish factors and elements, and has the tendency and possibility to benefit others at the expense of others, then no one can be allowed to engage in political chaos, no one can be allowed to hold absolute power, but must contain and limit anyone's power .
Therefore, understanding human selfishness provides a more substantial theoretical basis for opposing corruption and dictatorship.
Selfishness is a social attribute based on human nature.
After analyzing why people are selfish, the historical and eternal problems of selfishness seem to be easily solved.
Since selfishness is ancient and human beings exist, it is reasonable to speculate that it will exist forever.
Former U.S. President Nixon said: "Idealists long to see a world without conflict, where all differences between nations are overcome, all ambition is abandoned, and all aggressive or selfish Impulses have been replaced by individual and national benevolence. Yet such a world has not been and will never be."
Eng--G--Si said that man evolved from the animal world, which means that he will never be able to completely get rid of animal nature, but can only get rid of it to a certain extent.
What is the "beast nature" that En-G-S refers to?The author speculates that this "beastly nature" must contain the element of "people infringing on the interests of others".
Since there is an element of "violating the interests of others", this means that there must be "selfishness".
Of course, there is a logic that makes many people hesitate to speculate about the future, especially the eternal future, that is: what can explain the past may not necessarily explain the present; what can explain the past and the present may not necessarily explain the future, How about "eternal future"?
Selfishness, again, is historical.This is in terms of its specific content.In ancient times, people would have conflicts over the possession of extremely limited food, and would fight over a dead animal, fighting to the death.
These details may change completely as productivity and culture evolve.Human beings compete for interests in more advanced forms. People in developing countries compete for a bicycle and a black and white TV set, while people in developed countries compete for the possession of cars, limousines, airplanes, yachts, and villas.
Several conclusions drawn from the above discussion In summary, selfishness has two objective effects, negative and positive.It would be incorrect to say in general terms that it is the root of all evil, or that it is the root of all good.
That being the case, selfishness cannot be generally denied, and what should be denied is vicious selfishness.
Reasonable selfishness should and must be affirmed.
In the most colloquial terms, 'for oneself', or 'for us' cannot be objected to in general.In fact, human society is constantly developing under the drive of individuals and groups for themselves and for the world.
This is the deepest and most fundamental psychological driving force for the advancement of human society. It is difficult to imagine what kind of human beings and what kind of human society will be without this psychological driving force.Leaving aside the specific content of "for me" and "for us", assuming that this is only regarded as a tendency, this is beyond reproach and a very natural thing.
Because people always exist in the form of individuals and groups.
As a human being, we must survive, develop, and enjoy. (To be continued..)
ps: Note: Thank you Zhixiu for your support, thank you!