It was in $5Au's self-interest, at least short-term, to be with a friend. And it led to a 42-year friendship and counting.

Thank you. I didn't think it was either.

+1 RMP! It really isn't that hard to understand. :)

He jumped on that grenade to save his friend who he valued highly. That was not altruism.

ok. don't know. never been in such a situation

snort

You right - sorry about that

the grenade is going to go off either way. The question is: if I throw myself on the grenade, will my actions save lives? It is a perfectly rational decision.

I went joined the Navy in 1964 for selfish reasons--I didn't want to get drafted and have to spend two years in the Army. In four years the Navy taught me to fly, gave me gold wings and a white uniform (which turned out to be a real chick magnet) and a reasonably short but safe tour flying anti-sub patrols. I think that was value for value.

I don't need to convince you. You've said several times in this topic that you want to learn. Based on your stated motivation, buck up and pick up a book.

It hasn't been difficult to provide you with good answers. Multiple people have given you great answers on this topic. That you seem to want to further beg the questions, as if you haven't received valid information from them, comes off below your level of intelligence.

Come on, Robbie; you've been on this forum for almost 2 years and you have almost 400 topics. Don't you think you've tested the waters enough to read a little book like The Virtue of Selfishness, or Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal? Be a sport. :D

Then why did you argue that?

If the individual sacrifices greater values for lessor values, then it is altruistic. Otherwise, no.
There is not one right answer to this that includes everyone's views about values. We are NOT Borg.

I doubt if any vet would ever be for conscripted military service

If you were really curious, you would take the personal responsibility to research some of these issues by reading from the source (as some have suggested), rather than polling opinions. You've been on this website a long time. No one can 'lay it all out for you' and I'm sure you know this.

You're a smart guy that makes great point now and then, but it seems you are only interested in sniping at Objectivism while trying to cloak it in curiosity. You've stated recently, you don't think Objectivism is worth further investigation on your part. That's fine. Rational people will disagree at times. It's part of learning.

point

Hello Robbie53024,
I have dealt with this one before. For me it comes down to where one places the freedom of their posterity and loved ones in their hierarchy. If you cannot live with the consequences of seeing your loved ones (or your countrymen for that matter) live under tyranny of various degrees then you may determine that your sacrifice is in your best interest. If you would rather die to see someone else live because you could not live with the alternative... You may voluntarily enlist for many reasons even if a direct threat to your person is not imminent. Certainly one should take up arms in retaliation, but it is not outside objectivist doctrine to choose the life of another over one's self. The difference is between coercion/force and choice.

"Concern for the welfare of those he loves is a rational part of one's self interests. If a man who is passionately in love with his wife spends a fortune to cure her of a dangerous illness, it would be absurd to claim that he does it as a "sacrifice" for her sake, not his own, and that it makes no difference to him, personally and selfishly, whether she lives or dies.

Any action that a man undertakes for the benefit of those he loves is not a sacrifice if, in the hierarchy of his values, in the total context of the choices open to him, it achieves that which is of greatest personal (and rational) importance to him. In the above example, his wife's survival is of greater value to the husband than anything else that his money could buy, it is of greatest importance to his own happiness and, therefore, his action is not a sacrifice."

..." If it is the man or woman one loves, then one can be willing to give one's own life to save him or her---for the selfish reason that life without the loved person could be unbearable."
TVOS, pages 51-52
The principle is universal.
Regards,
O.A.