Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I do take issue with your idea to "put others' interests ahead of their own."

I don't believe that putting "others first at the expense of yourself, and then silently expect[ing] other people to somehow take care of your interests for you" is actually "put[ting] others' interests ahead of [your] own". That's still self interest, it just utilizes the Covert Contracts you mentioned.

I think good leadership is self sacrifice. Being able to adjust or set aside your expectations without resentment will not help you win a war or run a country, but it will help your marriage, friendships, and children. Once I learned to adjust my expectations for people, I let go of a lot of bitterness and I was able to focus energy elsewhere. This is more of a personal outlook for me--I'm not arguing with you, I just wanted to clarify my position.



I think we're actually in agreement, but these issues are hard to discuss clearly because the words and ideas surrounding them are pretty muddled together.

I would argue that the type of leadership you are talking about is still ultimately self interest- it is still putting your own ideals or goals first, and being willing to endure hardship or difficulty to accomplish them. Wanting your family, relationships, etc. - things you care deeply about- to thrive is hardly self sacrifice.

This is a philosophical argument as old as the hills... but it seems that often what one calls altruism, another calls self interest, and they can be talking about the same thing. For example, in Ayn Rands books she emphasizes "selfishness" as a virtue, and yet her "selfish heros" are usually people working on some hard technical problem that would mostly benefit other people, and her "altruistic villans" are doing some type of empty posturing to make themselves look good, to gain personal social status and power. So her concepts are pretty muddled as well- was Stalin really evil because he put others needs before his own? That seems like a pretty silly take for someone mass-murdering their political opponents while living in multiple palaces.

Ultimately, I don't find the dichotomy of selfishness vs altruism to be a very meaningful distinction- it seems like people can easily categorize anything into either category. Things I think are "good" usually involve taking seriously both your own and others needs, looking for good solutions with creativity and an open mind, and being willing to endure hardship to make things better.


It seems to me that people always miss the factor that ultimately determines the differences between self interest and altruism, which is intent. If an action is performed without thought for oneself, yet there is some result that aligns with self interest, that does not somehow nullify any aspect of altruism. Why? For one, people cannot predict the future. What may be perceived as good in one instant can quickly become horrible in another. Similarly, what is in one’s best interest is also subject to perception and changes over time. And finally, one is not always in control of the outcome. I would agree with you that for an act to be viewed as self interest vs altruism is a matter of opinion, when intent is unknown. However, whether or not altruism exists at all (because "it’s not altruism if they somehow benefit") is not - which I am not accusing you of making that argument, though it may be interpreted that way by some.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: