Thank you very much for this post! I was going to write about this myself, but you saved me the effort... now I can link to this discussion.
I'm actually one of those that actively try to reclaim the word. Here's why: The key distinction that needs expressing is: how important the well being of others is to your own. The importance of OTHERS' interests to you is what matters, not your OWN interest.
And the problem with the word "selfish" is, that it gives the completely opposite impression. The word has the root "self" coupled with a strong negative connotation. It is, inevitably, the source of a very widespread confusion -- that the "self" is the very thing that makes the word bad.
These two words, "selfish" and "selfless", are absolutely awful words, because they couple particular meanings with a totally incompatible lexeme -- "self", which helps perpetrate the erroneous notion that behaving in your own self interest is bad, and abandoning your own self interest is good. I'm not just making this up -- it is, indeed, a very VERY common mistake that people make, and it causes a lot of harm. You see that the negative connotation of "selfish" is beginning to creep into other expressions, such as "self motivated" or "behaving in own self-interest". Somehow, people just imply that this is done to the detriment of others, without saying it... Some things are just so important that they should be said explicitly!
You say that changing the word's definition would make it meaningless. I agree! Absolutely. That's the point, though! I believe that it would be best if the words "selfish" and "selfless" were RETIRED FROM USE.
You are right, of course, that the distinction between self interest that gives importance to well being of others and the self interest that disregards that well being is very important -- but we need a different pair of words for it, because "selfless" and "selfish" are simply too dangerously misleading. So, no -- I'm not advocating to change the definition of words "just because". I think that in this case there is an extremely good reason for it. (And btw., it started with Ayn Rand for me, too).
It would be best if both words had the very thing that makes them good and bad -- the value of others' well being -- as their root. Unfortunately, I don't have many suggestions... How about using "inconsiderate" instead of "selfish"? Do you agree that it would greatly reduce the confusion that surrounds the word?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 7/3/09 04:06 pm (UTC)From:I'm actually one of those that actively try to reclaim the word. Here's why:
The key distinction that needs expressing is: how important the well being of others is to your own. The importance of OTHERS' interests to you is what matters, not your OWN interest.
And the problem with the word "selfish" is, that it gives the completely opposite impression. The word has the root "self" coupled with a strong negative connotation. It is, inevitably, the source of a very widespread confusion -- that the "self" is the very thing that makes the word bad.
These two words, "selfish" and "selfless", are absolutely awful words, because they couple particular meanings with a totally incompatible lexeme -- "self", which helps perpetrate the erroneous notion that behaving in your own self interest is bad, and abandoning your own self interest is good. I'm not just making this up -- it is, indeed, a very VERY common mistake that people make, and it causes a lot of harm. You see that the negative connotation of "selfish" is beginning to creep into other expressions, such as "self motivated" or "behaving in own self-interest". Somehow, people just imply that this is done to the detriment of others, without saying it... Some things are just so important that they should be said explicitly!
You say that changing the word's definition would make it meaningless. I agree! Absolutely. That's the point, though! I believe that it would be best if the words "selfish" and "selfless" were RETIRED FROM USE.
You are right, of course, that the distinction between self interest that gives importance to well being of others and the self interest that disregards that well being is very important -- but we need a different pair of words for it, because "selfless" and "selfish" are simply too dangerously misleading.
So, no -- I'm not advocating to change the definition of words "just because". I think that in this case there is an extremely good reason for it. (And btw., it started with Ayn Rand for me, too).
It would be best if both words had the very thing that makes them good and bad -- the value of others' well being -- as their root. Unfortunately, I don't have many suggestions... How about using "inconsiderate" instead of "selfish"? Do you agree that it would greatly reduce the confusion that surrounds the word?