“The most selfish man,” a wise man once told me, “one who is disinterested.”

“The most selfless man,” he continued, “that is the most selfish.”

I could not understand what he meant, yes, I dismissed these words as gibberish ramblings of a mentally disturbed man, but the answer was in my head for a long time.

It is easy to understand why someone can be selfish, because it’s just a regular human behavior (as a reference behavior these days). Best case is a defense mechanism triggered when one feels threatened. In the worst cases, it is the devil and degraded human characteristic, which usually occur when people step and the contempt of all moral norms for personal gain.

Altruism is rare. Denial is natural – the ability to suppress their own needs for the benefit of others. In other words, there is a will to prevail over the other will be a common basic needs to give. For obvious reasons, in a purely materialistic view of this behavior is completely illogical.

Considered in the material sense, selfishness and altruism pays only brings sadness. The adage “Nice Guys Finish Last” captures this sentiment can be particularly concise and precise.

Where all this is left as before, and his words of wisdom are to be achieved? Was it simply blabber incoherent or shed, which had words of wisdom?

Try to get one more shot, it is clear that their words have no meaning if you have a very material point of view. In fact, the only way to make sense of these words can be done by a global vision of life and the world: a vision that includes the life of this world and beyond.

The other life is eternal importance, naturally more attached to it. The meaning of life in this world pale in comparison with the ephemeral. This does not mean that life in this world is worthless, it just means that the true nature of this worldly life is its use as a vehicle for success in the next.

If a person trained in the concept of priority over the life of this world, there is a radical change in him. It is visionary and believes that all success is limited only to this world, is not really succeed. Its goal is to have eternal life to succeed and not within the limits to maximize your chances.

The sole purpose is to focus on success and eternal in a way regarded as selfish in that regard. But it is a form of enlightened self-interest, selfishness, manifested in altruistic behavior in this world. Similar equipment selfishness, self-interest turns a success, but not at the expense of others.

On the contrary, the man who de-prioritizes success in eternal life and they attach great importance to your bottom line behave selfishly. He is blind to it, but it’s really short evolution.

The track was right. It could have been more simple and clear, but, but the words have lost their effectiveness. His words were worth their weight in gold, and if we all take seriously the world would be a better place to live

A new study finds that children can at the age of 15 months to distinguish between right and wrong. According to British newspaper Daily Mail, the researchers at the University of Washington found that the distinction between what is right and wrong skill found in children even at the age of 15 months.

The scientists observed that children age mentioned able to demonstrate a good understanding of what is just and unjust, they were able to distinguish between equitable distribution and not just for food, for example.

There were also a relationship between the sensitivity of the children’s behavior and justtheir willingness to share with others their favorite toy.

The researcher responsible for the study, Jessica Somerville, said, “Our study shows that these standards of justice and altruism are gaining more quickly than we thought.”

She added that the study also showed a relationship between justice and altruism in children, for example, those who are more sensitive to justice in the distribution of food, they are more likely to share with others their favorite toy.

Source: UPI

Being happy together, have fun, build a strong and intimate accomplice … A contract is torque, even implicitly, of these ideals in love. At first, no need to make efforts to make the magic radiates one-to-head and body to body. Then the hormones settle down and reality reasserts itself. “This is the time to put his own,” say the substance of the professional assistance to couples. The means are known: give himself time to lavish attentions, the desire to grow. In short, take care of each other. In Italian, “I love you” says: “Ti voglio bene” (”I wish you well”) … A nice formula that does not mention the burning passion, but love in its most altruistic , the most generous and the most idealistic. This one thinks so inseparable from the love she seems obvious. To love means to desire the good of another, how could it be otherwise? And yet …
Ulterior motives

Psychoanalysis, by allowing us to explore the swamps of our unconscious, we face the dark side of our fine sentiments: envy, jealousy, hatred … But fed romantic and willing to affective and emotional comfort, we forget this happy dark side. And we underestimate its strength. The psychoanalyst Jean-Michel Hirt says that “a good conscious intention may be subject to less worthy motives as the desire to dominate the other, making it dependent on itself, and even to suppress his own aggression by attention, care and gifts. ” Therefore, he said, it never hurts to question his motives altruistic, especially if they are very generous, very frequent, or if it is promoted to the tune of “Everything I do for you “or” You are everything to me

These are the mysterious explanations of human behaviour

Human behaviour continues to  be in most people’s minds and this you can’t  ignore.

Blushing

You turn red when you lie, and this reveals weakness, a way of being insecure

Laughter

When you laugh endorphins are released, this is of  mood-improving, and you laugh but it is produced by banal comments than jokes.

Kissing

It is unlikely to be genetic, not all human societies do this, a theory that has been from the ancient time that humans weaned their vhildren by feeding them from their mouths which reinforced a link about sharing saliva and pleasure.

Dreaming

A theory of dreams in expressing your subconscious  of desire has been discredited, and recognises the help of process emotion, these visions seen are not properly explained.

Superstition

The unusual but reassuring habits make no sense in  evolutionary, but ancient humans have benefited from this, and religion seems to tap in this impulse.

Picking your nose

An unappealing habit, and is most common, at least  most teenagers do on the average of  four times daily, some people think it  livens the immune system.

Adolescence

The unpredictable  years of teenagers, allows you to experience and experiment taking responsibility and recognise yourself before adulthood.

Altruism

An odd behaviour  giving away things simply a group bonding or gives you pleasure. Sacrificing what you have for others.

Art

Painting, dancing, sculpturing, and music, are some of the potential one shows, or is equivalent to another, and also is a way of improving knowledge, and to share your experiences.

Body hair

You have fine hair on your body and thick hair on the genitals, this is the opposite of what is seen in primates, which are of your close animal relatives.

The aspects of life which go on from  one generation to another, which is most fascinating of you than yourself.

With so many traits, that remain enigmatic.

            What is clear is that it depends not only on learning, but also on particular capacities and characteristics of the brain. You cannot teach language to your cat, however hard you try. There is evidence from fossil remains of skulls of a rapid increase in brain size preceding the emergence of Homo sapiens which would have been consistent with the accelerated development of a cognitive capacity such as language probably evolved because of its value for communication in group hunting.

       Humphrey (1986) has put forward the idea that consciousness itself evolved in humans because of its adaptive value. In many social species, like ants or bees for example, specific instinctual patterns control social interactions. The social behavior of humans is of a different order; much greater flexibility and freedom from fixed patterns is made possible by language and the far greater capacity for learning and intelligence. It has also been argued that a sense of identity as well as the capacity for consciousness must also have been of great value in social relationships. It helps us, for example, to distinguish between other people and ourselves and to imagine ourselves in their situations.

        The origins of a sense of identity have been also been linked to altruism- the motivation to help other people. It is more difficult to explain altruistic behaviour towards people who are not related to each other. Altruism in this case would not confer any evolutionary advantage. Nevertheless, such behaviour is a common feature in human societies. Thus, helping others, in the long run, is likely to facilitate your own reproductive success and hence the prevalence of such a gene will be increased. This is called ‘reciprocal altruism’. Such a situation must have depended, however on a clear sense of identity among the participants so that favours given could be returned in the future to the individual who helped in the first place.

         The development of identity would thus have been tied in with the evolution of reciprocal altruism. These arguments are inevitably speculative but they are useful in encouraging us to think about possible reasons for the evolution of consciousness and personal identity.                

Most bodies chase amusing norms, or conform, best of the times. Solomon Asch’s analysis shows that best bodies crop or abandonment to amusing burden from a accepted or accepted group. Acquiescence is acquired by cohesiveness, which is the allure of a actuality appear a group, by the accumulation admeasurement and by the affectionate of amusing barometer in the accident (descriptive or injunctive).

Norms access behaviors back they are important to the person. Situational norms can access behaviors unconsciously. Bodies tend to accommodate for two reasons. One acumen for acquiescence is the appetite to be liked, and the added acumen is the appetite to be appropriate or accurate. These two affidavit anatomy two kinds of amusing influence: normative and informational.

The few people, who abide conformity, do so because of absent to absorb individuality and because of absent to ascendancy their own life. Homosexual and physically challenged individuals cannot accommodate alike if they ambition to do so, due to laws and concrete barriers. Alike boyhood can access majorities. Minorities generally belittle how abounding bodies allotment their aforementioned convictions.

Popular strategies to get bodies to accede or say “yes” are the “foot in the door” (asking for article baby and accomplish bigger requests until the ambition is reached, such as giving out samples, to get bodies to buy the accomplished item) and the “lowball procedure”. Cialdini explains that the low brawl activity is acclimated by car salespeople, who activity an alluring accord and, later, they get the administrator to adios the deal. The angle chump then, instead of leaving, accepts the modified, worse deal. Another archetype of this activity is to ask for a baby donation for a account in barter with a advertisement for article free. Once the donor accepts, the donor is abreast that there are no added coupons, and the donor tends to accord anyway. Both tactics, “foot in the door” and lowball, use charge and consistency. The “door in the face” (asking for article big and again de-escalating to the baby adapted item) and the “that’s not all” (the activity is followed by article abroad that body the bulk of the antecedent offer, such as an added bonus, or a abridgement in price) strategies use reciprocity. The “playing adamantine to get” (the offered account is limited) and the “deadline” (offer is accurate alone for a short, specific bulk of time) strategies use scarcity, which agency valuable. Cialdini’s “social validation” acquiescence activity uses advisory amusing access and conformity, by adage “this is what bodies in this group/field/industry do”. Flattery, liking, acclaim and adulation are alignment strategies. Adulation is authoritative oneself attractive; adulation is based on friendship.

Symbolic amusing access is back bodies access others after actuality present, due to their accord and their goals. These goals can be reminded by thoughts or brainy representations that account behaviors (Baron, Byrne, & Branscombe, 2005). Accordance is a blazon of amusing influence. Stanley Milgram showed how abominably bodies obey from low ability authorities, alike to abuse an innocent stranger. This annihilative access can account absolute atrocities, such as the Holocaust. This blazon of access is acquired by the built-in barometer that says that bodies are declared to obey authorities, or the barometer accompanying to the “foot in the door” strategy. To abstain annihilative obedience, it is important to admonish bodies that some obedience, abnormally the accordance involving harm, is inappropriate and it is important to questions the motives of authorities

Most bodies use access approach at work. Occasionally, apprehension still used, are arrogant tactics, such as burden (threats and intimidation, generally use by debt collectors) and legitimating (pointing to the law, alike if inaccurately). Added approach are: adorning address (arousing joy by targeting able ethics and values), appointment (asking for the angle customer’s accord in accommodation making), barter (promising article for complying), claimed address (appeal to accord and loyalty), and affiliation architecture (looking for others’ support).

In a amusing setting, in case of an emergency, bodies may acknowledge in a array of ways, from boldness to apathy. Examples are casual by a bottle window and seeing two bodies interacting with anniversary added in an abnormal way. Could one be a thief, are they affronted or not? Another archetype could be seeing addition on the boarder of a roof top of a 14 adventure architecture and back asked what he’s doing, he replies that it is the appointed smoker area. Is he to be believed? Due to the circulation of responsibility, the added the bodies are in a group, the beneath acceptable individuals are to arbitrate in an emergency, such as addition affliction (in a accessible activity or afterlife situation, such as abandoned on the highway) and the greater is the acknowledgment or acknowledgment adjournment (bystander effect). Whether or not a eyewitness helps depends on a 5 footfall accommodation process. First, the attestant has to be acquainted of what is activity on. Second, the attestant has to apprehend an emergency is happening. Third, the eyewitness has to accept responsibility. Fourth, the attestant charge apperceive what to do. Last, the attestant or eyewitness has to accomplish a accommodation to booty action. In added words, a amenable by stander pays attention, considers alternating explanations, thinks of herself or himself as actuality as amenable as any added eyewitness and takes the accident of authoritative a fool of himself or herself.

Emotional states can additionally either enhance or arrest a pro-social behavior. The individual’s amount of affinity determines altruism. Affinity is in dogs and dolphins as well. Examples are dogs that accept fabricated account by extenuative a animal out of baptize or a fire. Affinity of advance derives from a aggregate of DNA and acquirements experiences. Altruistic bodies are empathetic, just, socially responsible, average egoistic and accept in an centralized locus of control.

Volunteer workers are motivated by both egocentric and affectionate reasons. Surprisingly, abiding volunteers are motivated by egocentric reasons. Back faced with moral issues, such as integrity, affectation and self-interest, bodies await on their capital motives. Back the affair actuality helped and the abettor are similar, the helped one reacts negatively, activity amateur and base and resenting the helper, but, later, gluttonous self-help. Back the two parties are different, the helped one reacts absolutely but is not motivated to seek self-help later.

The affinity altruism antecedent hypothesizes that affinity makes bodies advice added bodies who charge help, aloof because it feels acceptable to help. The abrogating accompaniment abatement archetypal hypothesizes that bodies advice others to feel bigger about their own affecting stress. The compassionate joy antecedent hypothesizes that the abettor is motivated by accomplishing to accept a benign appulse on the helped one. The abiogenetic determinism archetypal hypothesizes that altruism is abiogenetic because alternate altruism and across-the-board fettle are allotment of the evolution. In summary, pro-social behavior is best acceptable an acquired abiogenetic affection that can be added or hindered by situations, acknowledgment and affects.

Altruism can be selective, in the case alone one person, such as a kid, in a accumulation of bodies in need, gets help. Allowance can be as blithesome as bistro dessert. Generativity is the people’s absorption in allowance ancestors to come, such as efforts in actuality “green” to accumulate a safe and apple-pie apple for approaching youth. To conclude, both males and females can be appropriately altruistic with hardly altered motives.

References

Baron, R. A., Byrne, D. R., & Branscombe, N. R. (2005) Amusing Psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

In a relationship, it takes patience, trust, and compromise. If you can’t seem to find the right person maybe it has to do with you. If you want a person who is successful, spends lots of money or time on you, and will be there for 24/7 you are not being realistic.

There was a time when a relationship was about finding companionship. Sharing a laugh, a meal, your thoughts and dreams. Now it is more focused on “What can you do for give Me!” A familiar scripture says “There is more happiness in giving then in receiving”. Than why don’t people think that way?

Unfortunately, they are thinking of what they can get out of a relationship instead of what they can give or bring to it. That is why unselfishness is important when looking for a relationship, developing a relationship, and maintaining a relationship. You have to practice unselfishness it is not going to come naturally.

When looking for a relationship reach out to persons who need a friend. Sure they may not be the most popular, prettiest, or wealthy but they have something to offer. Everyone does. Most persons say they don’t have the time and effort to put into a relationship, they want the perfect person to just appear. If that does happen please advise how and where; you may even want to market it because everyone will be there to make a purchase. It doesn’t happen. Time, effort, and patience is needed to have a relationship and to be willing to give of yourself. It means being unselfish.

Be friendly, a good listener, show empathy, encourage people, be self sustaining, strong, positive, and trustworthy. People will be drawn to you and you will develop relationships. Good lasting relationships that may even turn into love. All because, you decided to stop being selfish.

.

Good and evil, on the other hand, are completely self-orientated perceptions. What one person considers any level of good, another may consider some level of bad. This is, arguably, the most basic form of conflict between people on (among others) an interpersonal, multicultural, and international scale. The question, then, begs, why do we not all have the same perception of good and evil? The answer, I believe, is both simplistic fundamentally, yet very complex socially, and the solution to this conflict would appear to have no existence based on the fundamentals of the problem (that being good vs. evil, and the personal and social extremism associated with preserving good and eliminating evil).

Good and evil, I believe, can be defined quite simply and universally (although the attributes for each would be unique to each person) both psychologically and biologically. Psychologically, good equates happiness, enjoyment, bliss, joy, security, and so on, and evil equates sadness, despair, depression, fear, distress and so forth. Biologically we can relate each (good and evil) with chemical releases within the brain to obtain (or create) a certain emotion. What, then, creates ones perception of good and evil, resulting in different emotions psychologically and biologically (that is, the release of, say, dopamine vs. adrenaline).

In simplistic form, our perception of good and evil can generally be observed in universal forms when we are younger, before we have been absolved into our cultural and social construct. Good and evil will generally be the same for a young child. According to Maslow, this would include our physiological, safety, and love/belonging needs, respective in order according to level of importance. Because our needs are vastly more basic when we are younger, we generally have the same concept of good and evil, because the situations that would incite fear, distress, sadness, or happiness, joy, security for one child, will, in the vast majority of cases, be the same for another child. Playing with a toy will make most children happy, whereas a hungry child will make them distressed.

As we grow older, or mature (however that term can be defined), our inter-relationship dependence and involvement begins to become more obvious. Our needs become much more complex, considering, now, our diverse amount and level of relationships, as well as our life experiences. Our perception of good and evil are now also defined by our parents, peers, culture, society, religion, and whatever other variable you can imagine. Good and evil is now not just simply what your basic needs were as a child, but is now an evolving, dynamic and complex definition. This is where, I believe, humanity falters.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau had a philosophical model of humanity in which he believes humans are happiest when their life is as simple as possible. The fewer variables, simplistically, that can contribute to our perception of good and evil, I argue, is the key to contentment. In Rousseau’s model, he uses indigenous people for evidence of his theory, and some critics of Rousseau argue that this is too small of control for basis of argument. True, that might be, but let us consider the argument that I subject; that of the nature of our children and their innocence.

The problem with society, today, is that we confuse our perceptions of good and evil by complicating our relationships with secondary priorities (materialism, religion, ideals) which trump our primary priorities (see Maslow’s hierarchy). Historically, this argument can be supported by religious crusades, war, genocide, and so forth, which continue to repeat themselves today. Humans are confused with the importance of defending our ideas rather than preserving humanity, love, and altruism, which are our most basic needs for survival (among others).

Rousseau believed that you cannot turn back history; that is, in our current society and world, we cannot go back to being simplistic indigenous beings. Our complexity is so great and interweaved at this point, that it would be impossible to reverse our current construct. The argument, however, I present, is that the change that humanity needs, in this sense, is not external, but rather internal. I agree that our current social construct is impossible to reverse, yet we can change our attitude and control our perceptions; we have free agent (or choice). Rousseau argued this perspective as well, that self-love was the ultimate key to happiness. If we were to realize that our priorities, which we believe are survivalist, are in the wrong order, we can exist in our current structure still, with only a much different perspective of the world.

At this point it would appear as though I suggest that humanity needs to reduce itself to a simplistic, child-like form. In a sense, that is correct, however much to simplified. I believe, in our current construct, it is also important for us to develop and progress, as a species, intellectually, artistically, technologically. This is a very vague idea, and is meant to be so, as the ultimate destination of this progression can be something different for everyone. I suggest, at this point, a more liberal view in our progression, one which emphasizes tolerance and removal of prejudice. The child-like form I propose is that we ensure our priorities for survival remain as simplistic as possible; so as to not allow ideas, such as materialism, trump our other basic needs such as love and belonging.

Ultimately, it is our disagreement of good and evil, which is responsible for our condition, but only because we confuse which “good” and which “evil” is more important. If we can reduce our behaviour to a more mature child-like form (basic needs of Maslow), then we can successfully align our perceptions of important good and evil. It is cliché to say, yet we are all 99% more alike than we are different, yet we are at war with ourselves and each other over the remaining 1%.

First, our ability to have a thought, to have the chance to use the knowledge that we’ve gathered alone and together, and choose. There is undoubtedly circumstances in which the system or environment can limit or completely remove this unique evolutionary ability, and anything that brings those circumstances to anyone are things that we should be changing. Everyone. Aside from the very, very strong ethical point of view, we also no longer have time to wait for things to get bad enough for everyone before we act. Use your voice, express yourself, and help others. You’ll be amazed at what we can all do together.

And second; humans have the need and ability to observe chaos and create order. Create order. An oxymoron. Very suiting if we look at our world today. At a young age, human kind discovered that by standardizing things we could streamline many things. By doing this, we could make things easier, more accessible, heck, we could even have more than we need. Much more. From farming, to the printing press, to the assembly line, to the fast food joint, to your TV. But, our newly found ambition was tainted by our youth and ambition and we forgot to learn some very valuable lessons. Even Charles Darwin, the evolutionist who also theorized about the survival of the fittest, was well aware that overspecialization in a species can be a quick path to extinction if conditions are suddenly dramatically changed. Today, with more and more information and technology becoming much more available to the entire world, we’re now able to see some of the most extreme results of our craving to put things in order, to overspecialize. We’ve become a world specialized in consuming, and of much more than we need, and much more than we have. Diversity is what makes the world great. It gives us fantastic new perspectives, new ways of doing things, and different people who all have something unique to offer the world. We will always have our differences, and there will always be conflict, but it’s how we overcome our conflicts that defines humanity. We can all get along. Our differences are what makes us strong, what makes us adaptable. By oppressing what makes us unique, we have created our own social-fascist mentality. And it never feels good to have to hide what makes you who you are, what makes you individual. Be honest with yourself, be honest with others, and be you. We don’t need inflexible orders, we need intelligent and logical guidelines which welcome scrutiny, curiosity, and, most importantly, creativity.

Some of us might not have noticed, but our world is changing very quickly. This is our chance to create something completely unique, something amazing in the world. But it’s also our chance to continue to repeat history, or worse. Let’s learn from our mistakes. A great inspiration to the world once said, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” What do you choose?

BLOOD WRITING

By Soccolich 

One day I dropped out of the sky to get a better view of the children of mass hypnosis.

It was a day like any other day, clouds in the sky, vast curvy and drifting, birds sang in code about this predator and that, and the old, gold sun blissfully burned right through every atmospheric layer like the devils own eyeball.

Spinning as I eased to a landing descent, I heard children laughing in the park because they knew their nannies were paid to love them and their parents were too far away to care. Barely noticing, dogs barked because they were trained to protect their own owners who feared every human body found in the outside world, and in that same outside world everyone else wore headphones because society had disintegrated into the loneliest pinpoint of artificial individuality.

A little further downtown, a doctor’s limousine circumnavigated zoned apartment complexes encased with illness and dire suffering. A little girl cried as the exhaust fumes of his mechanical beast filled her tiniest of noses. But no one listened, so her crying subsided. She turned it inward. There would be an ear to catch that backdrop sooner or later. Perhaps it would be in prison, or in the shelter – maybe on the six o clock news. In the system, it didn’t matter.

You were hypnotized to make money. At the same time, you were hypnotized not to notice there was very little money for you to make. The so-called ‘financial experts’ made sure they kept eighty eight percent of all the money for themselves.

And they, the money masters, up in their acrylic towers, choked on their own brand of bowel spraying illness. They were sputtering on their own gluttony. Nature wouldn’t allow for it. Despite all their best impersonations of a pork roll, they too had evolved up from hard working cavemen who fought for every stitch of flesh and bit of growth.

Just like the rest of us.

Failing to move, their wily arteries turned into bark and their stench of the ‘finer things’ filled the room right alongside their filthy arrogance.

In the schools, the prisons, the shopping malls – great processions rolled on – waiting to cleverly outdo one another. They were told the winner takes all, or at least gets first dibs. What they weren’t told was the winner had always to watch his back because a future winner waited in the wings to stab deep and articulate glory brand new. In the system, the ends always justified the means.

There at the churches, the government buildings, people getting married prepared to populate, seven, eight billion people was not nearly enough. Famine, drought, human slaughter, this was the vision of the future. High paid officials and tax-free bishops, they all had that same blueprint pasted on their walls.

And out their windows, all alongside the avenue, the poor, brain damaged citizens who couldn’t keep up with the churning wheel, each of them watched their pride fly off with the pigeons. When they begged out a dollar they were thinking drink before food. Could you blame them? Their life was always the hell of no ceiling, because they knew in the shelter they’d get beaten, broken and outdone, just like in the prisons and in the shopping malls.

I gave my best to the bankers, those overlords, who were able to print the money and dictate its value. I reminded them I remembered value. I also remembered honor, dignity and altruism. Most importantly, I remembered how each of these old ‘things’ was flushed away by that magical bottom line, Profit.

Have you met the prophet, Profit?

…Street-name Weeble, I heard a kid called that down there; I wondered just how long it would take poor Weeble to become another hypnotized meat-sack all rolled up into a big, sweaty ball of Enlightenment.

 I really did.

copyright 2010 Soccolich, all rights reserved