[quote name='JSweeney']Now, at the very basic level, everything, even charity, can be viewed as an inherently selfish action.
You donate money... why? Because it makes you feel good. Yes, there are philantropic things that add into it, an can be more noble reasoning, but at it's base level, you do it because it makes you feel good.
All of this foolish imagining and pedestal creation you're doing is to make you feel good... to bolster your ego, and to make you feel important. By creating this false image of a goddess, you're giving yourself importantance and stroking your ego all at once.
You're singlemindedly selfish, to the point where you probably aren't even going to talk to her because you're more in love with the idea of her and how it makes you feel.[/quote]
A proponent of psychological egoism are we
That's not necessarily true though. Yes, pleasure is often a result of our actions. However, just because it often results does not mean that it's always the chief motivation for what we do.
I go to university, and as a result huge debts await me in the future. Is that why I go to school? No. I go to university and there's a large number of attractive women here. Is that Why I go to school? No. I have to eat everyday and as a result I need to shit daily too. Is that a chief motivating factor? No.
Accordingly, do I donate blood just because it feels good afterward, or because I genuinely like to help people? Why is possibility #1 automatically favored over possibility #2? Why can't it just be possibility #2? Why can't it be a little of both? Why can't it be motivated by some other factor that isn't as readily apparent? I'd speculate that the answer is that psychological egoists are just cynical. :lol: In reality it could be any of those possibilities.
In addition, residual pleasure can also be far less prominent than other emotions that result as a consequence of our actions.
Example, a few years ago I conceded to ending a long-distance relationship with a girl I really dug because the separation was too much for her. Did I feel "pleasure" from doing the right thing, acting altruistically and conforming to a moral/social convention? A bit perhaps. For the most part however, I felt lasting and relentless emotional distress for months afterward. If I was acting out of selfish motivation there I really did a poor job of maximizing my pleasure to say the least.
I don't argue that there isn't a lot of essentially selfish human action. However, I don't think it's possible to prove that our pleasure is always the chief motivating factor in our actions.
That said, it sounds to me like the OP is forming his own reality in his head and he loves it(not necessarily her) so much that he doesn't want to risk puncturing what he's envisioned by approaching her. Don, you should get it over with and talk to her before the image inflates anymore.
In addition OP, by basing your reason for living upon a person(especially a person you seem to barely know on a personal level) you're setting yourself up for pain later. People and things come and go. Nothing lasts always. especially first loves.
Clinging on to a reason to live that is outside of yourself will leave you with nothing but emptiness to hold onto when the "Kate" phase of your life ends. I'm not saying you shouldn't relish the experience and relationship you develop with her. Indeed, live in the moments and treasure them when they're there. Just have some perspective and don't let it be the center of your life.
That pic of Bob Saget cracks me up every time I've see it, and it's done that to me for years.
in' roared.
k :lol:
