every action is selfish...

At the very least, that takes many generations to take effect, and who is to say there is not some fundamental problem that lies beyond our understanding.
Great minds have labored in Africa for centuries, and yet, progress seems miniscule.
Helping individuals to better themselves is simple enough, it doesn't mean a particular civilization can be saved.

Granted, America has favored stability over change, and that may not have been the best thing for many countries.

Like in most things in life you cannot measure with precision particular cases but you can measure general macro tendency's...you just have to use statistics on human behaviour at large to see patterns emerge from it...from that perspective pragmatical tendency´s in motive can be generalized...

Yes, I believe it can happen, however, at times it may need to rise from the ashes.

I don't think it can be asserted that actions are anything other than actions.
Selfishness is a motive, not an action.

I'm always fascinated by the fact that Egypt was a very advanced culture 5,000 years ago, but they stagnated about two thousand years ago, and very little advances were made since then. They built the pyramids, one of the seven wonders of the world, and was built around 3,000BC when their culture was much advanced for their times. They practiced medical care, and even had the skills to mummify remains of humans and animals for them to survive centuries. Theirs was an advanced culture/civilization for their times, but what happened to them when everything seems to have come to a halt?

What "statistics" will provide macro human behavior since then and the future?

Can you provide us with some of those "statistics" on human behavior that can provide information to predict future macro human behavior? Does that apply by whole cultures or individually?

I too find that of interest, there are many similar instances throughout history.
Sometimes it is the smallest thing that tips the balance and sends a species or civilization into extinction. What a complex world we live in.

I can !
...for instance in the sixty´ s there was this study going on about psychopaths behaviour in which there was a test regarding the human proneness to kill without regret...it was expected a rate of 1% to 3% or 5% I can´t really tell...scientists were amazed to discover that the number was actually around 70%...the test would consist on someone applying for a job where the employee would apply a given electrical charge dosage to someone who was being interrogated under their bosses orders...most people followed instructions without questioning their acts even when told the exact amount human body could endure before death...
...of course 70% coincidently also consists on the magical number to the back bone of a societal structure to what we usually call "the people", the common folk...to this people in the pre historical period following orders blindly was of essence to survival...

wow! 87 posts in less than 24 hours!

That's really kind of interesting, you could use that info in a lot of areas.
That probably has something to do with the reason dictators are able to maintain power.

...indeed...but if you want to go wilder 70% its a critical mass number for many other things concerning Nature...

...in the long run if we are ever to leave earth and up to the stars, what we need is another kind of 70%...those who are today 25%, the guardians of knowledge, the technocrats must become the new 70%...and the Genius, the Creative s, 5% now...the new 25%...the only ethical acceptable way to achieve it is with intelligence enhancers...of course...

That would mean 30% is the leadership sector?

yes, more or less, read above...

Well, evolution will continue it's course so it seems at least plausible.
In fact, it could very well be how we got here.

has it could be the fastest way we get out of the picture...(hope not)

I'm familiar with those studies done at Stanford and Yale. They had to stop the experiment because so-called "normal, intelligent" students applied more electrical charge when directed to do so. What that study proved was that any "normal" person can become violent against others when directed to do so.

What has that got to do with any culture or society at large? We are not all prone to "experiments" or conditions to prove a point. Even amongst general conditions observed in any society, such as Naziism, there were people who were against it, and did heroic things to save Jews and others.

That doesn't prove anything about how people are prone to help other humans in need - whether through self-interest, greed, or charity.

The topic of this thread is "every action is selfish...."

None of this speaks to the question I raised. Why assert motive as a part of the definition? Statistics don't touch motive.

A
R
T

I agree with your conclusion; motive is not measured, because it's impossible to relate motive to outcome.

I might be inclined to agree, but I've chosen to define actions as selfish or altruistic as products of who gains a benefit and who gains a risk (even if both are mutual). I can't measure motive, so I feel no need to try an force it into the definition.

E.g. - A person jumps in front of a bullet is an altruistic act. It is altruistic because is benefits another person and adds a risk/hazard to the jumper. The motive for jumping is unnecessary in summarizing the act itself.

Remember, at no point have I asserted that all altruistic acts are morally good or that all selfish acts are morally bad. So there is no application for a relevancy argument a la "an action is just an action."

A
R
T

Are you actually asking why asserting what compels people in general act the way they act is or can be of importance ???

because the deep nature of their actions and how we see them changes when we can assert motive fa...and we can assert general motivations or otherwise you would n´t have a law system in place...motive can change a verdict....