puzzled...

[jay]

What's wrong with "self-denial while helping others-in-need" as an ethic? For me it feels like almost a matter of honor...

Comments

[phinnia.livejournal.com]

It's all about lines. The Romans said 'nothing to excess', right? I'm inclined to agree with them. A certain amount of self-denial while helping others in need is reasonable and honorable; but if you don't look after yourself, you're not going to be able to continue helping anyone. And sometimes that means stepping back, saying no, and being selfish a little bit.

[airshipjones.livejournal.com]

The problem is that if you deny yourself the things you need, and you see it as a denial, then you really cannot help other from a position of strength. You will constantly be wearing yourself out, while not getting back what you need to get along, and it isn't a zero-sum game. You will crash-and-burn eventually.

There is a difference in setting priorities such that you take care of your needs, and help other in need, but don't place a high priority on wants or luxuries.

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

I think there isn't anything particularly wrong with the idea of subverting some of one's wants while fulfilling the want of helping another fulfill their wants and needs. It can be reasonably moderated as a good and healthy tactic at times - but as a philosophy?

Well, there's that whole "self-denial" as an ethic - seems to me that denial of self is wrought with all sorts of ugliness. I'm much more all about "self-fulfillment".

Apart from that though - I see a slippery slope leading quickly to the martyr scene of looking-to-help-others as an excuse for self-denial. And in that there's all sorts of unpleasant stuff tied up. Guilt, misplaced expectations, obligation, sacrifice, etc. Ewwww.

Borrowing from my own example, not quite as bad is the ethic "self-fulfillment through helping others-in-need" while de-emphasizing the still present tones of the above, it better illustrates the also present above view of value of self through others.

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

If I understand the question right, my answer is this:

That ethic sets you up for feeling used and/or ignored, because it puts YOUR needs in THEIR hands as well as their needs in yours. If you don't get your needs met, I believe it is better to be able to say "Well I can fix that" rather than "Too bad somebody else would have to take action in order to fix that".

As they say before each flight

[anisoptera.livejournal.com]

"Put your own oxygen mask on first, then assist others."

[sinboy.livejournal.com]

It depends on whether or not they know what you're doing, and are OK with it. If they are, fine. Otherwise it's using them without their knowledge or consent.

Lets take a reasonable example. I'm over here, and I need a lift to somewhere. You volunteer, and drive me over. Now, on it's face, that's a neutral situation. I get a ride, you get to feel good about having done something for me if that makes you feel good.

But if you were denying yourself something you wanted to do, like going out to a party, I'd probably tell you to go off to the party and that I'd find a lift elsewhere. If I really needed you, I'd probably feel a bit bad that you sacrificed something to help me out.

Worst case would be that you picked me up, didn't go to the party, and didn't tell me. At that point, despite you having done something for me, I'd be pissed off at not having the option to decline the lift because you going to the party might be something I didn't want to interfere with. I've got an expectation that friends will let me know about these things, and a right to say no if I choose to do that.

If it were something minor that you were denying yourself, like ice-cream or a rest after work, I'd be less inclined to expect to know about it, and not pissed that you didn't tell me. I'd probably be grateful, and also feel a bit bad at having put you out when you wanted rest though.

It's all a matter of scale, and consideration for other people's feelings. Does this make sense?

[rivka.livejournal.com]

There's nothing wrong with it in moderation, but when practiced in excess, it inevitably leads to bitterness and resentment.

...as an ethic

[tendyl.livejournal.com]

It denies that you, yourself, are as important as the individual you are helping. In time that self-denial, could cause more harm than the good you are doing by helping others in need (which negates the utilitarian ethic). In some regards, I could argue that it uses people as a means to avoid your own problems.

Hmm, semi-jumbled. I can unpack that a mite more if you'd like when not on drugs.