WHAT’S SO BAD ABOUT BEING SELFISH?

14:24 Unknown 0 Comments






Most of us assume that selfishness is both wrong and unhealthy. But is this true?
Selfishness means acting in one’s rational self-interest. Contrary to popular opinion, all healthy individuals are selfish. Choosing to pursue the career of your choice is selfish. Choosing to have children–or not to have children–is selfish. Insisting on freedom and individual rights, rather than living under a dictatorship, is selfish. Indeed, even ordinary behaviors such as breathing, eating and avoiding an oncoming car when crossing the street are selfish acts. Without selfishness, none o f us would survive the day–much less a lifetime.
Selfishness does not mean self-destructive behavior. In other words, a car thief is not selfish. He has to run from the law constantly, something most car owners never have to do. Even if he escapes the law, he will not experience as much pleasure from possessing the car as would an honest person.
Lying to your spouse, or any loved one, is not selfish. The psychological stress of trying to “live the lie” of an extramarital affair–or any major secret–is enormous. A selfish person understands that honesty is the best policy and the least painful, in the long run.
The opposite of selfishness is self-sacrifice. Self-sacrifice means giving up a greater value for a lesser value. Consider the example of a battered wife, who is married to an alcoholic husband who refuses to seek help. She stays with him for reasons o f “security” and “family stability.” Yet in the process she sacrifices her self-esteem and physical safety (greater values) to the irrational whims of her husband (lesser values).
Consider the example of the hard-working student who allows a friend to copy his answers on an examination. The student is sacrificing both his integrity and his efforts (greater values) to the laziness and low self-esteem of his “friend” (le sser values).
Or, consider the envious individual who tries to get you to feel guilty for your hard-earned success. “You are lucky to have done so well,” the envious person says. “Now you have a duty to share some of your success with others.” Ce rtainly, a selfish person wants to share his success with those he genuinely cares about–his family, friends, or children (greater values). But why should he make sacrifices to individuals he does not know or care about (lesser values)?
Selfish individuals give to charity–if and when they choose. A selfish person is not “stingy.” He simply values the use of his own judgment in making decisions about how to spend his money, and when to give it away.
Most of us assume that some selfishness is healthy, but “too much” selfishness will lead to loneliness and despair. This idea rests on an incorrect definition of selfishness. Selfishness means acting in one’s rational self-interest. By ” rational” I mean that one can logically prove that an action is in one’s self-interest–in the long run as well as the short run.
For instance, Mr. Jones might think that it is in his self-interest to cheat on his wife, in the short run. But if he considers the long-term, he will understand that he loses her either way by lying to her. If he really loves his wife, he will feel te rrible if he lies to her. If he no longer loves his wife, it is senseless to continue living with her and conducting an affair in secret. A selfish individual does not like to lie, because he sees that it does not bring him long-term happiness.
Most of us assume that we cannot be both selfish and kind to others. This is simply not true. If a mother loves her son, it makes her happy to give up some of her money to buy him a bicycle. It is not a sacrifice–it is a supremely selfish act. Both mother and son benefit.
Similarly, the owner of a popular restaurant is not dutifully “serving the public.” He provides good food and a nice atmosphere so that he can make a profit and beat the competition. Both owner and diners benefit.
A physician does not provide quality treatment for altruistic reasons. He provides it because he is financially and emotionally rewarded for being competent and caring. Otherwise, he quite appropriately loses his patients. Both patient and doctor benef it from selfishness.
In a rational society, selfishness is encouraged. A rational society is one where individuals are left free to pursue their self-interest. In the process, everyone benefits. Rational selfishness means acting in your self-interest–and accepting responsibility for determining what truly serves your long-term interest. It is a nice alternative to a life filled with duty, drudgery and disillusionment.
We live in a world which does not even recognize the option of rational selfishness. We are taught, from childhood, that we must be either self-sacrificing or thoughtlessly “selfish.”
I maintain that this is a false alternative. Rational selfishness, if practiced consistently, is the means of living both a moral and psychologically healthy life. If you choose to recognize this alternative, such a life can be yours.
The following two tabs change content below.BiLatest Posts
Dr Michael Hurd

DR MICHAEL HURD

Dr. Michael Hurd is a psychotherapist, columnist and author of "Bad Therapy, Good Therapy (And How to Tell the Difference)" and "Grow Up America!" Visit his website at:www.DrHurd.com.

0 comments:

The unscrupulous use of Sanctity brings Caution

10:42 Unknown 0 Comments

Law of Power
Judgment:  
The unscrupulous use of Sanctity brings Caution
The effect of unscrupulous use of sanctity can bring you great hazard even can endanger your life. By using this rule against any one you can destroy the most common trust that links you with common people. You can probably end up making so many enemies who can easily harm you without even coming to your observations. Sometimes your own people can conspire against you.
 TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW:

Towards the end of 1763, arose a quarrel between the Jats and the Baloch. At that time Jat community was led by Maharaja Suraj Mal (13 February 1707 - 25 December 1763) (महाराजा सूरज मल, भरतपुर) was ruler of Bharatpur in Rajasthan in India. He has been described by a contemporary historian as "the Plato of Jats" and by a modern writer as the "Jat Ulysses", because of his political sagacity, steady intellect and clear vision. He was one of the greatest warriors and ablest statesmen ever borne in India.
He ordered his son Jawahar Singh to direct his attack upon Farrukhnagar, held by a powerful Baloch chief, Musavi Khan. But he having failed to capture it, Suraj Mal himself came and laid siege to strong fort of Farrukhnagar in October, 1763, with all his forces and big artillery. Two months passed away and Musavi Khan being hard pressed, consented to surrender it if Suraj Mal would take an oath on the Ganges water not to hinder his departure.  But the Jat on this occasion made the same unscrupulous use of the sanctity of the Ganges as that of the Quran by some Muslim rulers. The Baloch chief was made a prisoner and sent to Bharatpur. Thus, after a siege of two months, the fort of Farrukhnagar, along with all its effects came in the Jat possession on about 12 December 1763.
Garhi Harsaru, Rewari and Rohtak had already fallen into the hands of Suraj Mal. He now turned his arms against Bahadurgarh, about 12 kos to the west of Delhi, the strong-hold of another powerful Baloch chief Bahadur Khan. In his distress, the Baloch chief appealed for help to Najib-ud-daula, who however judged it inexpedient to provoke a war with Suraj Mal, before the arrival of the Abdali. 
By the year 1763, the Jat power under Suraj Mal had reached such a glorious height, as had never been attained before.  Owner of a spacious kingdom, of the richest and overflowing treasury,  and of the most formidable and gallant troops unrivalled in contemporary India, as Suraj Mal was, little wonder that needy persons like Mir Qasim of Bengal, turned their eyes for help to him. 
Fight between Suraj Mal and Najib
The Baloch incident, in turn, precipitated a clash between Suraj Mal and Najib-ud-daula, both of whom looked with an evil eye at each other. The allies of Najib had succumbed to the Jat stratagem only two days before he could reach Delhi (14 December 1763).  Najib, dreading the tremendous strength of his foe, attempted to placate him more than once. But Suraj Mal was so much annoyed with his conduct that all his efforts proved to be of no avail.
The mediators sent by Ruhela chief failed to pacify him. The couriers came back disgusted to Najib on 23 December 1763.  Suraj Mal, leaving Jawahar Singh with a strong garrison at Farrukhnagar, crossed the Yamuna south of Delhi and stayed on the west bank and burnt the villages in neighbourhood of Ghaziabad. Thereafter the Jats returned south of Delhi. The Ruhela chief, on getting this news, marched out of Delhi with his forces and stood in garden of Khizrabad within four miles of the Jat troops. But he repaired to the city without engaging them in a battle. Meanwhile, Suraj Mal, detaching his baggage, again crossed Yamuna and encamped on the other side. making a last minute desperate bid, Najib sent his agents with a present of two pieces of beautiful Multan chintz and a message to Suraj Mal expressing his superiority but a request to go back. This appeal failed to calm down the exasperated Jat Raja who sent a challenging reply on 24 December 1763. The die was caste now. Najib-ud-daula, taking Gulab Singh Gujar, Sayyid Muhammad Khan Baloch (Siyyidu), Afzal Khan, Zaibita Khan and all his troops, less than 10000 in number, crossed the Yamuna two hours before dawn and took post on the west bank of the Hindan, 10 miles south-east of Delhi. Suraj Mal with his army of at least 25000 strong and heavy artillery pulled up opposition to them. Several small engagements occurred in which the Jats displayed their superiority. Cannonading was also resorted to between the two sides which lasted till 3 pm. Thereafter, Suraj Mal tried to surround his foes from three sides, deploying 5000 men to Najib’s rear. About sunset (the same day i.e. Sunday, 25 December 1763),  Suraj Mal while watching the movements of the troops with small retinue, was killed by Siyyidu and his men who most probably lay in ambush for him. As usually happens in such cases, the leaderless Jats, overwhelmed with shock decamped the same night (25-26 December 1763), thereby conceding to Najib-ud-daula “a victory which no one had expected,” The Jesuit observer aptly says that Najib and his men “were victorious without knowing it.
Interpretation:                                                                              
Raja Surajmal was very powerful leader, he had great army but the use of sanctity arose a strong feeling of revenge in minds of his enemies, his enemies used his deed to integrate different leaders to fight against him. Though he had vast army who could have destroyed every army fighting against him but he forgot to increase his security. This gave his enemies a chance to directly attack him and eventually ended killing him.

Keys to power:                                                                 

When you are attempting a tool of power which can bring you enemies you should become more aware of your conditions. After attaining power you should crash all the evident of your unscrupulous use of Sanctity. This will bring you power and will protect you from bringing more enemies.
“If someone puts their hands on you make sure they never put their hands on anybody else again.” 
 
Malcolm X




0 comments:

09:12 Unknown 0 Comments

who are jats and why raja surajmal attacked the mugals ? how much he earned from attacking mugals ? 

0 comments:

Simple is rare

13:15 Unknown 0 Comments


0 comments:

13:08 Unknown 0 Comments

LAW OF POWER :

When competing for power, beware of your Close ones. Wait for right Opportunity.

JUDGEMENT :
be calm at the crucial time that can make your way to attain power. when you are competing with your closed ones for power. never make the first move. let them do their action first. wait for your opportunity. by showing patience you can achieve great favor or advantage of opportunity.

QUOTE "“Patience is a conquering virtue.” 
                         ― Geoffrey Chaucer

TRANSGRESSION AND OBSERVANCE OF THE LAW

In 297 BC there was a king named BINDUSARA. he was the second emperor of the Maurya Empire. During his reign, the empire expanded southwards. He had two well-known sons, Susima and Ashoka, who were the viceroys of Taxila and Ujjain, respectively. He ruled his empire from his capital named Patliputra (patna Of Modern India).During his 50's he was attacked collectively Greek and Khurasani Armies. The greek army was headed by Seleucus I Nicator, who was one of the Diadochi. Having previously served as an infantry general under Alexander the Great, he eventually assumed the title of basileus and established the Seleucid Empire over much of the territory in the Near East.  
The Khurasani army was headed by Mir Khurasan. Mir wanted to take revenge of his daughters death Noor who was the wife of Bindusara. Both armies were strong. They attacked the city of patliputra and easily captured the fort. Bindusara dropped his arms in front of Seleucus and mir. Meanwhile ASHOKA and SUSHIMA got to know about the war.They came with their armies to save their families. Seleculus and Mir knew that if both of Bindusara's will attack. They would loose the battle. So they asked Ashoka and Sushima for their escape in exchange for Bindusara's and his families life. 




0 comments:

What happens when we get IGNORED ?

08:07 Unknown 0 Comments


0 comments:

IS "HELPING PEOPLE" A RIGHT LIFE GOAL??

13:11 Unknown 0 Comments



IS "HELPING PEOPLE" A RIGHT LIFE GOAL??


Everyone is saying that a right life goal should have something through which we can help others.
i want to ask you - IS "HELPING PEOPLE" A RIGHT LIFE GOAL??

In this world every one of us is suffering from some sort mental problems.
Most of the problems come from non-interaction with people, inability to understand desires and habits of people.
We feel isolated even when we revolve around lots of people.
With all these non-interactions, why should we make helping others as a life goal ?
We should clear one misconception that most of us suffer with,
First of all we should not forget that real satisfaction can only be achieved by helping others
When we say help others, we generally means to help nature, nature not only comprises of Humans


but Animals, Birds and all other living creatures. In these modern times we forgot that there are other living creatures who also share this earth with us.






HERE ARE SOME WAYS BY WHICH WE CAN MAKE OUR LIFE A SATISFACTORY SUCCESS.

You can get instant happiness by helping BIRDS.

These are some easy ways you can help birds.







Most of us like to help animals. we know how it makes us happy.


There are some instant links that we can use to make our experience better.





















We should make our best efforts to make the life of
those in need, 
those who are poor, 
those who are sick, 
those who are disabled,
Better.
So that we can collectively make this world a better place 






Because Some one said 


THE BEST FEELING OF HAPPINESS IS WHEN YOU ARE HAPPY, BECAUSE YOU HAVE MADE 
SOMEONE ELSE HAPPY  


0 comments: