Covid and Selfishness

[Wrecktal]

I’ve head the word ‘selfish’ being used a lot in relation to Covid. I remember reading Dawkins in my twenties, and being quite blown away by the concept that we are all selfish - and that even the most altruistic act can be perceived as indirectly ‘selfish’. With Covid, and listening to David Attenborough about the most likely cause of Covid - I wanted to have a very scaled back Christmas. Yet I’ve ordered rubbish from Amazon, bought more mince pies than I need and not yet given to charity as I promised myself I’d do. Why? Because I’m selfish. Obviously my initial plans for Christmas would have been far more altruistic, but I chose to put my family first - which could ultimately be to their detriment. So - is the answer in the battle against Covid - to reach a different level of altruism,

Yes, I think NHS capacity has to be the only issue; ensuring that people who are injured or unwell for issues other than covid can still be treated. We shouldn't wait until Covid is anywhere near eradicated. We just need to get to a point where there are manageable levels of severe cases requiring hospital treatment. Masks and hand sanitiser can stay, but damaging practices like social distancing and opening hours etc should end as soon as possible.

It can't be just about avoiding deaths because then we would have to live like this forever. We can't stop nature.

Perhaps @Wishing14 but the bigger picture is more detailed than that.

In a scenario where complete control is lost those pesky small percentages start happening more and more. Younger and younger people die. That’s the point human psychology starts to come into play. If you’re living in a community that has no healthcare available stories of tragic circumstances start to circulate and people get frightened. Percentages and statistics don’t do much in the face of real life experience even one or two steps removed from it.

Basically, the economic and societal impact will be felt however this is managed but the recovery from a controlled trauma should be easier. Being a position of having to convince people to resume life (which happened to some extent after the spring lockdown) is not as strong for recovery.

When all the fake walls and graces fall away, the number 1 priority is yourself and your family.

If that's selfish, then big old shrug from me. I won't prioritise strangers / society over my family or myself. Most people feel the same I'd imagine.

@Blue565

When all the fake walls and graces fall away, the number 1 priority is yourself and your family.

If that's selfish, then big old shrug from me. I won't prioritise strangers / society over my family or myself. Most people feel the same I'd imagine.

Regardless of what people say, you are right. I don't believe for one minute people are placing others and the needs of society above their own and their family. I certainly am not and never will.

@Blue565 and @PhilCornwall1 but that’s precisely why we need leadership and governance. We hand responsibility for weighing up what’s harmful to a lot of people and only beneficial for a very few to a (theoretically) competent leadership who works to maintain the interests of the most people. Without that there’s anarchy.

There’s always an underlying sense of protecting your own unit but ultimately I don’t believe anyone currently living in the UK wants their way of life to change. We’re all very comfortable at the moment and despite differing views on how to do it, we all want to to continue with as little disruption to our lives as possible.

Even most acts of altruism have a selfish motivation - people do them because it makes them feel good, or because they think it will be reciprocated, or because they want praise

True, but I think it's weird that people see that as a bad thing. It's great that being altruistic makes us feel good - because otherwise we wouldn't do it!

We are animals. Highly intelligent, organised animals, but animals nonetheless, driven by the same impulses that drive other animals. We can strive to resist some of our less noble instincts to some extent, but self-preservation and the drive to look out for our close relatives aren't things that we're likely to override.

Even most acts of altruism have a selfish motivation - people do them because it makes them feel good, or because they think it will be reciprocated, or because they want praise

Or for some sports people and celebrities, a knighthood.

I think this argument takes the concept of selfishness to the point of meaninglessness. People are basically arguing that it is selfish to want to survive on this planet. Selfishness is about “seeking one’s own advantage, well being or pleasure without regard for others,” not about the entirely rational desire not to sacrifice yourself for the benefit of others like a latter day Jesus Christ. Selfishness is ultimately self-destructive - if everyone were genuinely selfish, we’d all be dead by now. You can only get away with truly selfish behaviour if you are riding on the backs of people who are more enlightened than you, who understand that nobody survives if they have absolutely no regard for anyone but themselves. So, in all, I think it’s a complete and utter waste of time to argue that everything anyone ever does is selfish in one way or another, unless you are rather pointlessly argue that it is selfish to be alive.

*trying to argue that

So - Labour would have advocated earlier, and stronger lockdowns. I doubt there would have been a tier system. Tories - the tier system, allows some freedom. Many people are rejecting this in favour of putting their families and personal risk/circumstances first. Is this a more far right wing/survival of the fittest type response?

@Wrecktal

So - Labour would have advocated earlier, and stronger lockdowns. I doubt there would have been a tier system. Tories - the tier system, allows some freedom. Many people are rejecting this in favour of putting their families and personal risk/circumstances first. Is this a more far right wing/survival of the fittest type response?

I don't know if I agree with the survival of the fittest bit, but at their core, the right believe in individuals being able to decide the right course of action for themselves as far as possible, whereas the left advocate a more state guided approach. What we have because of covid is more state intrusion than I think we've ever seen, so it's still pretty "left wing".

It's hard to say how Labour would have acted. Trying to balance the economic disaster, employment, education etc with keeping numbers down and keeping the trust of the public would have been hard. A lot of people felt that a localised approach was the fairest way, so I think tiers probably would have come in with any govt.