While I was home I had an interesting conversation on the idea of what it means to be ‘selfish’ and if anyone can truly be considered ‘self-less’ or ‘altruistic’. A deeper discussion on this might come in a later post, but for the moment, I want to discuss words and their meanings.
First of all, for me, words are just words. A word, in and of itself, is neither completely positive nor absolutely negative unless conjugated or reformed in order to express meaning one way or the other in full. In general, a word must have context to be totally understood as intending to express something good or something bad. Still, just a word alone is closer to a neutral entity, even if the definition suggests pure negative nuances as below.
adjective
Google search referencing Oxford definition
- (of a person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for other people; concerned chiefly with one’s own personal profit or pleasure. e.g. “I joined them for selfish reasons”
So, while I accept the general understanding of such words based on definition, I still argue that it is the context that best defines the intended use and expression of words.
With this in mind, I expressed that I do not consider the word ‘selfish’ to always be an expression of negativity despite the wide use of it as a less desired quality. For example, if one reads this – “He selfishly ate the last bite knowing that he needed to be the one to survive to save them all…”, does it carry an unjustifiable negative meaning? I would dare to guess that the answer is ‘no’, because the intention is that he will do something good with that selfish act. Thus, while he was “concerned chiefly with his own personal profit” being ‘selfish’ in this case is not purely negative. Get my point? Further, we could argue the definition as well as how do we parse out profit vs. pleasure or to what degree do we define ‘chiefly’. You see the conundrum, definitions are further made of words to be further defined and assigned meaning in context.
Anywho, I return to my argument that being ‘selfish’ can also be paired with being ‘self-less’ in meaning.
The context of the initial discussion spurring this topic was referring to adoption. While one could argue that it is a self-less or altruistic act to adopt a child, I argue that there is an element of ‘selfish’ness in it as well. Most people would naturally admit that they feel good about offering what they can to a child who has not had the fortune of being raised in a permanent home – whether biologically theirs or not. It is not that adopting is a negative action, but that it is not a pure act with zero benefit to the individual adopting. I further my argument that our understanding of ‘altruism’ is also false in that there can never really be a truly ‘self-less’ act as someone somehow benefits even indirectly.
Words are important; and it is even more important to try to understand the variety of nuances they carry when used. The English language is one of the most difficult languages in the world to fully acquire because we have such a variety of words that mean something similar, yet infer multiple dimensions of meanings, intentions, and expressions. It’s no wonder that many people around the world struggle to master it fully – even native speakers are not necessarily masters of their own language!
Yet, it also the beauty of language that helps us to better understand one another through conversations that deepen our knowledge of the words that we use and enrich our comprehension of the breadth of meanings it can express.
~T 🔥🐉♋️
