Friday, February 20, 2009

Self-centeredness

I've been pondering the idea of self-centeredness. Selfishness. Self-focus. Whatever you want to call it. Being concerned primarily with me and mine.

Not too long ago, I suggested changing the schedule for something. Someone to whom I made the suggestion asked for supporting reasons. As I listed the advantages, she countered each with an objection. I was torn between doing rebuttals and arguing for each point versus continuing my list. Did she want to hear a brief summary of my reasoning or not? I became agitated and confused as my points were torn one-by-one to shreds and scattered to the wind. Then my friend uttered words that ended the exchange totally. She said, "I can see how you think this would be good for your group, but there are other people to consider. You're not thinking about others."

Whoa! That's a serious accusation. It's not that I'm thinking only of myself but that I have identified with a group of people and don't care about anyone outside that group. Group selfishness. I'm willing for everyone outside the group to suffer in order to accommodate the needs and desires of me and mine.

The reality was, I wasn't particularly sold on the idea I was presenting. I had picked it up from someone else for whom a similar change had proven beneficial. I was simply sharing that information and asking about the possibility of trying it in our setting. If the cons outweighed the pros for everyone involved, I was perfectly willing to drop the matter. I'm not sure how including factors that would benefit "my" group in my list of advantages revealed the proposal to be basically self-focused. I think I caught my friend at a bad time and should probably let the comment go.

As the scene described has impacted my thinking on selfishness, however, I've been thinking about the spectrum from pure and complete selfishness to pure and complete altruism. I'm not sure either extreme can exist in pure form. At the conference I attended recently, I heard the results of scientific research that support Jesus' words that "It is more blessed to give than to receive." Those who give reap significant benefits in terms of health, happiness, and longevity. Thus, there is no giving that doesn't involve receiving of some kind. Once someone experiences the pleasure of giving, would they continue to give if all the pleasure were removed or does self-benefit become a motivation?

At the other end of the spectrum, one might expect to find some purely selfish people who care for no one outside themselves. Maybe such people exist, but they aren't obvious to me. It seems that everyone has at least a "mine" outside of their "me" for whom they care. At what point does "me and mine" become something other than pure selfishness? How large does the "mine" need to be to no longer qualify as selfishness? Is it me and my family? Me and those who suffer as I suffer or once suffered? Me and my social circle? Me and my community? Me and my nation? Me and my world? Me and my universe?

In between the two extremes of pure selfishness and pure altruism, there is a whole spectrum of mixed motivations for actions -- good for me, good for you but not me except when doing good for you makes me feel good, good for us but not them, good for them but not us except when doing what's good for them turns out to be good for us. When giving up my life turns out to be the way to gain it, is it truly unselfish to give it up?

Mostly, it all makes my head spin, but eliminating the end points of totally selfish and totally altruistic does put a different perspective on being labeled as selfish when a proposal that I'm tossing around might be of more benefit for "me and mine" than for some larger group.

No comments: