Recently I mentioned that Trump's primary motivation has been self-interest, which, of course, spurred some "lively discussion." I'm not discussing Trump. I won't entertain any conversation about him in the comments. That's not my point here. My point is "self-interest." Is it bad? Isn't it normal? What's the big deal?
I'd suggest that most of us operate most of the time on self-interest and all of us some of the time. It is ... human. Well, sort of. Not part of our definition, perhaps, but certainly part of our nature. Unfortunately, that would be the sin nature. "Really? Why would self-interest not be normal and moral?" Why, thanks for asking. (Nice when I can control the conversation, eh?)
Self-interest is indeed quite normal. So while it might be odd that I'd suggest that it's not necessarily good, I don't think, deep down, that anyone disagrees. Just the term "self-interest" evokes "selfishness" especially "to the exclusion of others." Which, of course, is why there were objections to my claim that Trump operated out of self-interest. That is, we know there's something ... not entirely right there. But, of course, what is common to humans isn't the best method of deciding this question. What does Scripture say?
When asked the greatest commandment, Jesus gave two. You know this; say it with me. "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself." (Matt 22:37-39) So, love is our first and greatest commandment. And in Paul's famous "love" chapter, he offered a critical component of love as "does not seek its own." (1 Cor 13:5) Its own what? Some fill in "way" or something and that's fine, but the basic comment is that love is fundamentally not self-centered; it is other-centered. Love is not about self-interest; it's about the interests of others. Paul explicitly says, "Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others." (Php 2:3-4)
The Christian life, then, is not primarily self-interest as it is for every other human being. It is regarding others as more important than you and looking out for their interests. Now, how does that work? Don't we need to look out for ourselves? If we don't, who will? "It's all well and good to hope that others will regard you as more important than they and it all balances, but it just might not happen. Then what?" And that's where we're different. As believers, we may and will experience failed love from others, but we will not and cannot experience failed love from God. We, uniquely, cannot be separated from the love of God (Rom 8:38-39). Our confidence in His love, then, enables us to look out for the interests of others.
Self-interest is normal and even Christians "look out for your own personal interests" (Php 2:4), but not in the way that the rest do. Self-interest as a primary motivation is normal for them but it is not a Christian virtue. Love is. Love doesn't seek its own; it seeks what's best for the other. I think, in the final analysis, that only believers who cannot be separated from the love of God are capable of that kind of love. I would urge us to make a practice of it.
14 comments:
As you suggest, I do not find "selfish" to be synonymous with "self-interest", though the former is self-interest to the extreme. Thus, self-interest is "not necessarily good" when it crosses the line into selfishness, which is exclusively the self.
But self-interest is essential in order to love one's self, and until one loves one's self, how can one love other as one loves one's self? The command seems to suggest an assumption about us loving ourselves, and doing it rather mightily. If I love others as I love myself, but don't actually love myself, then what? If I just barely care about myself, the command would imply that I do as much but no more for others. Love thy neighbor as thyself. It's either assumed we really, really love ourselves or that we should...or that we simply love others to the same degree we love ourselves, whatever that degree may be.
However, what if the command is actually referring to self-interest. It might be argued that mankind always acts in self-interest regardless of the level of self-love. We still eat and clothe ourselves, and charity is typically providing those essentials for others. So even if we're not particularly happy with ourselves, we can still provide for others in the way we provide for ourselves to whatever degree we're capable.
When your primary motivation is "a concern for one's own advantage and well-being" (the dictionary definition of "self-interest") there is no difference between "self-interest" and "selfishness." Paul argues that we all love ourselves as demonstrated by the things you referenced -- we feed and clothe ourselves. But the question is the underlying motivation. Is it my interests or is it beyond me?
That dictionary definition doesn't demand advantage and well-being be regarded as a bad thing. I’m at a disadvantage if I’m starving, and in that sense "a concern for one's own advantage doesn't mean I’m putting anyone else at a disadvantage by concerning myself with my own survival. So yeah, they ain't the same.
The most fundamental act of self interest is to seek to be saved.
the problem occurs when we play with words to create ideas. this is just parlay..
self interest vs selfishness. semantic traps abound.
we know when we are being selfish. what don't need is some high order cognitive thinking process to sort this out. every action comes from self interest. its only the consequences that determine if the interest is bad or good. so we got that going... this should kick a hornets nest. LOl..
Bob,
"every action comes from self interest"
Are you suggesting that altruism doesn't actually exist?
If i seek out what maybe in the best interest of others, is that not also in my best interest?
perhaps when we create two distinct interest, ours and others, we inadvertently create a dichotomy that has only a fractured solution set. what if they are not different?
as Marshal Pointed out.. we must love our selves to love others. so what if the greatest act of self love IS to love others.. and what if ... by loving ours selves, we generate greater desire to love others? i sense a problem here, i just haven't figured it out yet..
Altruism is a fine word, but no it does not exist apart from the people that care for others.
Putting up with you all these years is perfect example... lol.
qualifier:: My self love is defined by the fact that i am already loved by my father.
I don't know why you all keep thinking Stan is saying all self-interest is selfishness. He said "When your primary concern...is...(self-interest), there is no difference between "self-interest" and "selfishness"." Maybe you guys lost track in all his quotations and parenthetical clauses? Self-interest, in and of itself, isn't inherently bad. Its when that self-interest exceeds our interest in others that it becomes selfish and wrong. When we put ourselves before others, even if it means our survival, Bob, it is selfishness. As Christians, we should have nothing to fear in this life, especially death, so giving up our lives for others should be good, not bad, like the world sees it.
When asked, Jesus commanded, "Love God and love others." (or something close), When Paul describes love, he seems to describe it in terms of our actions toward others and specifically says it is not insistent on "it's own way". I'm not sure how much self interest that leaves the door open for.
Craig, I agree (mostly) with what you're saying. I note, however, that Paul wrote, "Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. (Php 2:3-4) First, then, "selfish ambition" is out. Then, it doesn't require that we consider ourselves of no significance, but certainly of less significance than others. And verse 4 specifies that we are to look out for our own interests ("not only"), but also others'. So there is room for self-interest, but it appears to end where everyone else's begins.
Stan,
I’m suggesting that there is some room for self interest, but that it’s not anywhere close to primary.
Okay, then I'll remove the "mostly" and go with "I agree."
I can see that the muse in my previous post has caused a reaction. I apologize
so my question is : is it remotely possible; that by loving and caring for others translates into the greatest expression of healthy self-interest?
If I want to be like Christ: (self-interest), then I must love others like Christ.
Every Preposition in the new testament starts with: If you Want...
if you want to enter the kingdom...
if you want to be great in heaven...
if you want to know the greatest commandment..
ultimately all the prepositions encourage diminishing emphasis upon our self-interest.
but it always starts there... so that by placing others needs above our own, we are satisfying our most noble self-interest.
ok this one is hurting my brain...
Dave if this doesn't make any sense, its ok, I have that affect on people...
Ah...!! Paul said "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others." The italicized is significant, suggesting self-interest is not a problem unless it is one's only focus. NOW it's selfishness.
Taking the previous verse into account, it's selfishness when self-interest excludes others OR when it is higher priority than others. "In humility count others more significant than yourselves." (Php 2:3)
Post a Comment