Universal Altruism and Egoism

[RWStanding]

Universal Altruism and Egoism
It must be observed that universal Altruism as defined is opposed to universal egoism. The opposite of everyone working for themselves is everyone working for everyone [ or indeed every community working for all communities]. That includes self in equality with others. As on the basis of do unto others ....!
Not to be confused with self-sacrifice as an individual act of an altruist in a particular situation. It may also be a rational act by an altruist community. But it is not a universal condition or act.
The quality of empathy and conscious knowledge that is the fount of these conditions or acts, self evidently exists in human and other species, and must be considered fundamental to existence as a definition of 'god'.

[TSBU]

[HexHammer]

Universal Altruism and Egoism
It must be observed that universal Altruism as defined is opposed to universal egoism. The opposite of everyone working for themselves is everyone working for everyone [ or indeed every community working for all communities]. That includes self in equality with others. As on the basis of do unto others ....!
Not to be confused with self-sacrifice as an individual act of an altruist in a particular situation. It may also be a rational act by an altruist community. But it is not a universal condition or act.
The quality of empathy and conscious knowledge that is the fount of these conditions or acts, self evidently exists in human and other species, and must be considered fundamental to existence as a definition of 'god'.

Incoherent nonsense and babble!!

[Greta]

Universal Altruism and Egoism
It must be observed that universal Altruism as defined is opposed to universal egoism. The opposite of everyone working for themselves is everyone working for everyone [ or indeed every community working for all communities]. That includes self in equality with others. As on the basis of do unto others ....!

Universal altruism is possible for other eusocial special such as ants, but humans have greater freedom and hopefully will continue to do so. I think the kind of society you are envisaging might come about with AI after (biological) humans have gone extinct.

[ken]

Universal Altruism and Egoism
It must be observed that universal Altruism as defined is opposed to universal egoism. The opposite of everyone working for themselves is everyone working for everyone [ or indeed every community working for all communities]. That includes self in equality with others. As on the basis of do unto others ....!
Not to be confused with self-sacrifice as an individual act of an altruist in a particular situation. It may also be a rational act by an altruist community. But it is not a universal condition or act.
The quality of empathy and conscious knowledge that is the fount of these conditions or acts, self evidently exists in human and other species, and must be considered fundamental to existence as a definition of 'god'.

Coherent, sensible, and quietly true.

But why write this?

[ken]

Incoherent nonsense and babble!!

What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?

[ken]

Universal Altruism and Egoism
It must be observed that universal Altruism as defined is opposed to universal egoism. The opposite of everyone working for themselves is everyone working for everyone [ or indeed every community working for all communities]. That includes self in equality with others. As on the basis of do unto others ....!

Universal altruism is possible for other eusocial special such as ants, but humans have greater freedom and hopefully will continue to do so. I think the kind of society you are envisaging might come about with AI after (biological) humans have gone extinct.

I think the kind of society being envisaged here WILL come about very simply, quickly and easily once greed is removed from society, and all the abuse ALL adults do to children is openly and honestly talked about and sought to rid of completely.

[HexHammer]

Incoherent nonsense and babble!!

What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?

It must be observed that universal Altruism as defined is opposed to universal egoism.
- why must it be observed? And exactly what is universal about this altruism that he describes? That's nothing but poetry in itself, and no philosophy, as philosophy is = "love of wisdom", which a harsh generalisation isn't in itself. What exactly is universal egoism? That's poetry too, neither are described in psychology, and you should know that psychology describes human nature.
..thus OP ends up speaking straight out of his ass already in the first line, thus it only gets worse with each line.

[ken]

Incoherent nonsense and babble!!

What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?

It must be observed that universal Altruism as defined is opposed to universal egoism.
- why must it be observed? And exactly what is universal about this altruism that he describes? That's nothing but poetry in itself, and no philosophy, as philosophy is = "love of wisdom", which a harsh generalisation isn't in itself. What exactly is universal egoism? That's poetry too, neither are described in psychology, and you should know that psychology describes human nature.
..thus OP ends up speaking straight out of his ass already in the first line, thus it only gets worse with each line.

Although I wholeheartedly agree with you that 'philosophy' = 'love of wisdom', and I was also wondering why MUST universal altruism be observed, I did not ask you anything about any of this. In case you missed what I actually meant when I wrote, "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer, I meant exactly that. I am literally asking you what IS coherent, makes sense and IS not babble to you?

What you have provided is an explanation of what IS incoherent, nonsense and babble to you. Can you see the difference between what I asked you and what you have provided?

I am seriously curious to know what actually IS coherent, makes sense, and is not babble to hexhammer. The reason I am curious to know this is to see if it is coherent, makes sense and is not babble to all other human beings also.

[HexHammer]

Although I wholeheartedly agree with you that 'philosophy' = 'love of wisdom', and I was also wondering why MUST universal altruism be observed, I did not ask you anything about any of this. In case you missed what I actually meant when I wrote, "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer, I meant exactly that. I am literally asking you what IS coherent, makes sense and IS not babble to you?

What you have provided is an explanation of what IS incoherent, nonsense and babble to you. Can you see the difference between what I asked you and what you have provided?

I am seriously curious to know what actually IS coherent, makes sense, and is not babble to hexhammer. The reason I am curious to know this is to see if it is coherent, makes sense and is not babble to all other human beings also.

No you didn't ask that, but that's probaly what you meant.

When you insist that I spell very simple things out for you, would only suggest that you lack very very basic cognitive abilities, until you get some cognitive abilities, I'll wait with my answer.

[ken]

Although I wholeheartedly agree with you that 'philosophy' = 'love of wisdom', and I was also wondering why MUST universal altruism be observed, I did not ask you anything about any of this. In case you missed what I actually meant when I wrote, "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer, I meant exactly that. I am literally asking you what IS coherent, makes sense and IS not babble to you?

What you have provided is an explanation of what IS incoherent, nonsense and babble to you. Can you see the difference between what I asked you and what you have provided?

I am seriously curious to know what actually IS coherent, makes sense, and is not babble to hexhammer. The reason I am curious to know this is to see if it is coherent, makes sense and is not babble to all other human beings also.

No you didn't ask that, but that's probaly what you meant.

Yes I did ask that. But as happens on way to many occasions what a reader takes something to mean can be different to what the writer meant. This is no one in particulars fault. It is just the way language and understanding has been formulated. Also the many varying different ways different human beings perceive things causes misinterpretation. Asking politely for clarification is the best way I found to not misconstrue things.

When you insist that I spell very simple things out for you, would only suggest that you lack very very basic cognitive abilities, until you get some cognitive abilities, I'll wait with my answer.

How in the hell can something that ONLY you, yourself, are aware of be a very simple thing to another? How will we ever know what it is if you do not express it?

OBVIOUSLY what is coherent, makes sense, and not babble to you is something that ONLY you are aware of.

Lacking very, very basic cognitive abilities or not has absolutely NOTHING AT ALL in what ONLY YOU know.

You will not answer Me because you are totally incapable of doing so, AND/OR because you are afraid that what IS coherent, makes sense and is not babble to you will BE absolutely incoherent, nonsense and babble to others. Either your emotions are stopping you or you do not have the cognitive ability to do so.

Just for your information I asked you that question because if you could write something that was absolutely and totally coherent, make sense and not be babble to absolutely everyone, then you could and probably would be classed as some kind of God.

Now either do it or not, but please do not try to shift the blame of your inability to just write something down by using My or any other's so called inabilities to understand you. Just now you may be realizing that it is YOUR inabilities that cause you to only see on so many occasions that what other people write is inchorent, nonsense and babble to YOU.

[HexHammer]

blah ..blah .....blah!! Yadda yadda!!

I don't owe you anything, you could start by saying the magic word!!

[ken]

blah ..blah .....blah!! Yadda yadda!!

I don't owe you anything, you could start by saying the magic word!!

Of course you do not owe Me anything. I never would say you did owe Me anything and by the way I do not want anything from you. I have not asked you anything hard nor difficult. I have just noticed that you have on a number of occasions remarked that what others write is "Incoherent, nonsense and babble". All I have done is just ask you "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?" Just to make it clear I asked you this in regard to absolutely anything at all. So you are free to choose anything you like. If you do not want to provide anything, then so be it. Your refusal or inability to provide a response to my question is of no real importance.

By the way I do not know what the "magic" word is. Nor do I know how "that" word would make any difference. I have never asked you if you could do some thing for Me. I have just asked you, "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?" If there is something, then I am sure you would have just written it down by now.

[HexHammer]

blah ..blah .....blah!! Yadda yadda!!

I don't owe you anything, you could start by saying the magic word!!

Of course you do not owe Me anything. I never would say you did owe Me anything and by the way I do not want anything from you. I have not asked you anything hard nor difficult. I have just noticed that you have on a number of occasions remarked that what others write is "Incoherent, nonsense and babble". All I have done is just ask you "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?" Just to make it clear I asked you this in regard to absolutely anything at all. So you are free to choose anything you like. If you do not want to provide anything, then so be it. Your refusal or inability to provide a response to my question is of no real importance.

By the way I do not know what the "magic" word is. Nor do I know how "that" word would make any difference. I have never asked you if you could do some thing for Me. I have just asked you, "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?" If there is something, then I am sure you would have just written it down by now.

First please answer me why OP would be coherent, sensible and quite true? ..which things are that?

Coherent, sensible, and quietly true.

But why write this?

[ken]

I don't owe you anything, you could start by saying the magic word!!

Of course you do not owe Me anything. I never would say you did owe Me anything and by the way I do not want anything from you. I have not asked you anything hard nor difficult. I have just noticed that you have on a number of occasions remarked that what others write is "Incoherent, nonsense and babble". All I have done is just ask you "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?" Just to make it clear I asked you this in regard to absolutely anything at all. So you are free to choose anything you like. If you do not want to provide anything, then so be it. Your refusal or inability to provide a response to my question is of no real importance.

By the way I do not know what the "magic" word is. Nor do I know how "that" word would make any difference. I have never asked you if you could do some thing for Me. I have just asked you, "What would be not incoherent, not nonsense and not babble to you hexhammer?" If there is something, then I am sure you would have just written it down by now.

First please answer me why OP would be coherent, sensible and quite true? ..which things are that?

Please answer Me this, why I should I answer your question first when I first asked you a perfectly simple clarifying question, which you are apparently refusing to answer?

I WILL answer your question after you answer my question. I will even give you much more freedom to respond as I was asking my question in relation to absolutely anything, not just in relation to this OP.