dr_who@umcp-cs.UUCP (08/14/83)
The only person around here who seems to agree with Paul Torek (that's me)
on the oppositions between selfishness, altruism, and the middle ground is
Kenneth Almquist. Or rather, I agree with him -- everything in
433@spanky.UUCP is dead right.
Alan Wexelblat thought he agreed with me, but then Tom Craver said
You state that you agree with Paul Torek that "the two [altruism,
selfishness] are not NECESSARILY opposed". First, I think that Paul
agrees that they are opposed - the dictionaries are clear on that
point. I think Paul believes that they are not contradictory - that
is, that there is no logical problem with combining the two.
I believe (I don't want to debate definitions any more, so this comment is
to be taken strictly autobiographically) that altruism (standard English
definition) and selfishness (ditto) are opposed as contradictories. And
now, a lesson in beginner's logic. Two opposites are contradictories if one
occupies all and only the "negative space" of the other. In other words,
the sets of referents of contradictory terms have a null-set intersection
(everyone knows that), AND their union is the universal set (few know that).
With contraries, on the other hand, only the null-set intersection need
apply. Example: "male" and "female" are contraries, while "male" and
"female or neuter" are contradictories. Clear enough?
Sorry if I've insulted any intelligences. Returning to the main point:
altruism-as-I-define-it is the contradictory of selfishness-as-I-define-it.
Altruism-as-Tom-defines-it, however, is the *contrary* of
selfishness-as-I-define-it. Tom defines altruists as exclusively concerned
with the welfare of others. I define selfish people as concerned exlusively
with their own welfares. I define altruists as concerned either exclusively
with others (True Altruists) or with both self and others
(middle-grounders). By "concern" I mean concern at the most fundamental
level, rather than merely as a means to something.
I hope it's clear why I call one set of terms contraries and the other
contradictories. Tom's "altruism" is incompatible with selfishness, but
those two do not exhaust our alternatives. (I don't specify whose version
of selfishness, because I think we agree on that definition.) My "altruism"
is incompatible with selfishness, and THOSE do exhaust the alternatives.
The one difference is that my "altruism" includes the middle ground, whereas
Tom's "altruism" excludes it. Of course, it is always open for Tom to say
that the middle ground is not a *real* alternative -- meaning that it's a
bad one, or that it is impossible for humans to practice. But this is
different from trying to define it away.
--Paul Torek, U of MD College Park