wally, when you can come up with a "rational" (quoting you from another post) reason selfishness is irrational... I'll listen. Give me one good reason I shouldn't be selfish or shouldn't put me, myself, I and my family first.
Don't say I'm cruel to the poor. That's not a rational reason. Don't say I'm part of society and should play nice. That's also not a rational reason
I think you'll find Libertarians are actually quite generous people.
although the word has implied negatives in society, that negative itself is irrational.
Selfishnness or greed is nothing more than how humans deal with scarcity.
If there was no such thing as scarcity, then there could be no such thing as greed or selfishness. If all products and services were "Superabundant" then no one could be described as selfish.
but because goods are not superabundant, we must deal with scarcity. That is a system to alot the goods or a system of property rights.
There are only a couple of options for assignment of the scarce goods.
1.All Goods are owned by all people - This obviously does not work, because if everyone owned everything, the implications are obvious. It would be disaster. This is the theology of socialism, and has proven itself to be unworklable. If everyone owns everything, how does one get to consume, etc... etc,,
2. All goods are owned by select or certain people. - This is technically monarchy or oligarchy or whatever you want to call it, but again the implications are obvious. Aside from the moral problems. This is a system of corruption and it is obviously so. Or one may say, self evident
3. Goods are owned by those who produce them or homestead them (mixing labor and goods). This is the only obvious moral system to assign property. It is the lockean system that is used in a real Capitalist system.
If one rationalizes this problem out, one wi;ll quickly see that option 3 or a lockean system is the only moral system for property rights. Therefore, words like selfishness or greed tend to loose their preconceived meaning. How can I be greedy by deciding what to do with what morally belongs to me. Since this is the only moral system, how can any actions in this system be immoral.
If I keep all that I produce without giving any away (what one may call selfish) what did I actually do that was immoral?
Any argument against this, must by definition, allow theft of property, and hence by definition, be immoral.