You cannot simply subtract everything you dislike from the equation in order to get the desired outcome. This is precisely what you're doing
You do not know how to reason, saying something is so, does not make it so, state a case, do not give me some strange metaphor and then emphatically tell me that is exactly what I'm doing... What are you on? I have subtracted nothing, I have accounted for everything entirely. Do not make weak allegations, make an argument, you really make me feel like I'm wasting my time here...
Details, please. It is easy to disagree, but hard for me to reason why, without proper explanation.
Again, you don't know how to reason, I do not prove the negative, you prove the positive, I was showing you the hole in your 'argument'...
/sigh, in other words, I was pointing out to you that your text comprised of this fatal error in reasoning, I cant believe your making me spell out the consequences of your own words:
If someone will do something that will have consequences, and one of those consequences are positive, that positive consequence must be a motivation for the willed action; that was the substance of your text; now again your going to probably say something stupid like: "I never said that", but that it is exactly what your text amounts to. The point I was making is, that is a logical non sequitur, it does not follow that that is necessarily so, I cannot make this point any more clear, I cannot spell things out any more than I am currently doing.
Below is a paragraph I wrote and you agreeing with me, what you fail to realize is that this paragraph dismantles the thesis of your argument entirely, I can only conclude that you cannot read... perhaps you should attempt reading it through again, and if you still agree with your initial assessment concede your pursuit, and if you don't, actually mount a real reasoned rebuttal... But I guess that would probably be way too much to ask.
If one would restrict oneself to your own formulation of selfishness, it is so vague and all encompassing in its application, it would seem to me that the word loses so much of its meaning and force that it can no longer truly exclude actual selflessness, i.e. it would seem an act could be morally selfless (made with no consideration towards the self), and yet be selfish according to your definition (because it happened to ex post facto render some benefit to the actor).
Precisely.