C f I .Jgcj.. - -
WILDGEN
Give or take
%
Survival is our instinct; selfishness, a virtue
In February 1995, two young boys
decided to go play on frozen Osier
Lake, Iowa, near Omaha. Highs had
been in the 50s and 60s for several
days. The ice was getting thin.
Without warning, the beys fell
through the ice into the frigid waters
below.
A passing stranger decided to try
to rescue the boys. However, the
maae me mice s
surface even
more unstable,
and the man
plunged to his
death during the
attempt. One of
the two boys
survived. For
several days the
man was lauded as a heartland hero.
Is that really what “heroism” is
about? Sacrificing one’s life to save
total strangers who are foolish
enough to risk their own?
I was flipping through the
channels after classes one day last
week when I noticed that “Oprah”
was on. They were talking to some
teen-age boys who were suffering
from the eating disorder anorexia.
These boys were literally starving
themselves sick, but they didn’t know
why they had no desire to eat.
Of course, a therapist appeared on
the show, and she gave an interesting
explanation of the psychology behind
anorexia. She said that the bpys were
trying to live up to & standard Of
“moral perfection.” They were so
«-—
The most basic requirements of life are
inherently selfish actions. You breathe
only for yourself, not for the benefit of
someone else.”
concerned about helping others that
they were neglecting their own
needs.
But is this really what “moral
perfection” is about? Concern with
others to the point of self-neglect?
These two cases are symptomatic
of the current moral climate in
America. Self-sacrifice is extolled as
a moral virtue in this country. The
Carter Lake tragedy makes that very
clear. But something else is also
clear: When self-sacrifice is consid
ered a virtue, hypocrisy is the key to
survival, and sincerity is a death
knell.
The most basic requirements of
life are inherently selfish actions.
You breathe only for yourself, not for
the benefit of someone else. You eat
to quell your hunger; you drink to
quench your thirst. You don’t help
anyone else by sitting down to
dinner.
j.1 *-■ '-j
-K : Aw4$ars wherc the ethics of
self-sacrifice—also known as
altruism—come into direct conflict
with the requirements of life.
To be consistent in your practice
of self-sacrifice, you must relinquish
your food to someone else. Anyone
else. And you had better not breathe
either, for that is selfish and flies in
the face of self-sacrifice. Offer your
breath to someone else—preferably
a stranger, since helping someone
you love would just perpetuate your
selfish enjoyment of their company.
Of course that course of action is
absurd and will lead to your death,
but what is the alternative? You must
breathe and consume food to survive.
Philosophically, you have two
options: either continue to accept the
ethics of self-sacrifice, or reject self
sacrifice and accept self-interest as a
virtue.
If you choose to acknowledge
self-sacrifice as a virtue, you have
two more options. You can be
consistent with your beliefs and face
the consequence of ignoring the
requirements of life—death, the : w
uhjmate self-sacrifice. Or you can
sneak a few breaths and a little food
and feel the overwhelming guilt and
uncertainty that your hypocrisy
brings.
If you choose to reject the ethics
of self-sacrifice, and to accept self
interest as your guide, you are free to
eat and breathe without guilt. You
can realize the joy and happiness of
fulfilling your real-world needs
through your own abilities and
without depending on the sacrifices
of others. You can have the self
esteem of knowing that your life is
your own and no one else can lay
claim to it.
The same ideas apply to the far
more complex activities of human
life, such as economics. Notice that
the chief sponsors of self-sacrifice—
the devout religionists—condemn
ambition, pride and achievement.
They scorn the rich—the business
men, producers, and entrepreneurs
who have earned fortunes making
life’s requirements easier to fulfill.
Instead, the religionists hold up as
examples of virtue those who fast
and pray their lives away, those who
act “without desire for material
reward,” those who preach that
happiness is not possible in this
world and that humans are depraved
sinners.
Well, if self-sacrifice is a virtue,
no wonder we’re all “depraved
sinners”—good grief, we’re still
alive!
■ - ' - ; J fa$3
<: if
•if fflftrtrwhpijiiidr iwli %
Daily Nebraskan columnist. |
R
Survey says...
It’s a fact: Statistics are getting pretty silly
Let’s talk facts and figures.
Did you know that one in 10 boys
has been kicked in the testicles by
another boy?
I didn’t.
Although,
I’m not exactly
sure that I
wanted to know
that one in 10
boys has been
kicked in the
testicles.
Yet a
survey by the
University of
New Hampshire made sure that I did.
I’m just curious to know who in that
fine university came up with the idea *
for the survey.
BOB: DangitJim! We need an idea
for a survey by 4p.m. and you
haven’t come up with a bloody thing!
JIM: Neither have you you bloody,
snickering little.. OUCH! You just
kicked me in the testicles! That hurt
Bob!
BOB: Hmmm..J think I’ve got
something....
And thus another useless survey
statistic is bom.
There are tons of them out there—
just pick up any piece of writing and
you will probably find diem.
Some are rather pathetic. The
American Hospital Association’s
Fifth Annual'Pet Owners' Survey,
(pick a shorter name for crying out
loud!) found that 57 percent of pet .
owners, if stranded on a desert
U
The American Hospital Association’s
Fifth Annual Pet Owners’ Survey (pick a
shorter name for crying out loud!) found
that 57 percent of pet owners, if stranded
on a desert island, would choose their pet
over a sexy celebrity for companionship.”
island, would choose their pet over a
sexy celebrity for companionship.
Huh?
The only thing this tells me is that
57 percent of pet owners spend too
much time with their pets. Honestly,
why wouldn’t you choose another
human over a four-legged companion
with the name of Fido?
What is there to do with a pet?
Candlelight dinners are out, un
less....
BOB: "Fido, you look nice tonight
The candlelight plays well off
your shaggy face...”
FIDO: "ARFH!"
BOB: "I mean, I’m glad you’re here
with me... ”
FIDO: "ARFH!’’
BOB: "You have no idea what your
companionship means tome.”
FOy&jtaUnKJiabinapto)
BOB: “Oh to bloody hell with it, I
should have picked Jim!"
Here's one final useless statistic,
brought to you by Fruit of the Loom:
82 percent of women say an uncom
fortable pear of panties ruins their
entire day.
Being a guy, I would never know
if it does or not. But I'll be daring
and go as fer as to say that it’s
common knowledge that no one likes
wearing an ^uncomfortaUepairof
panties,” guy or girl. Thus, that
survey is pretty useless as well.
However, I will never jump off the
deep end and say feat statistics are
useless. Many are essential to us,
while still others are sad.
Want a sad statistic? How about
The National Science Foundation's,
which found that only 4? percent of
adult Americans knew that the Earth
revolved around the sun once in a
year.
Or maybe U.S. News and World
Report’s survey that discovered 89
percent of all current smokers had
started their habit by age 18.
We learn from these facts and
figures and countless more, yet more
often, we just get drowned by them.
So should the media and industry
lay off stats? Maybe. I think they
should simply ask if their surveys or
statistics will benefit humankind in
someway.
Ask Union Products Inc. It is the
maker of a famous product that
hundreds of thousands of people buy
each year. Its founder first made the
product out of a foam material,
which dogs found edible and frankly,
ate it.
What extremely worthwhile
product does Union Pacific make,
prompting them to give out the
statistic that they sell 250,000 of
themayear?
Pink flamingoes. Ihe kind you
stick in your lawn.
Sigh— may that useless statistic
die with 250,000 people’s sense of
taste....
Kerber is a sophomore aews
edttorial major aad a Daily
Nebraskan cotumaist
