We always do what we most want to do

[dysert]

Here's a philosophical assertion that may not come as news to any of you, but I wonder if anyone disagrees with it? I say that everyone always does what they most want to do. For example, say I don't want to take out the trash, but at the same time I want my wife to like me. So, I take out the trash because the desire to have my wife like me is greater than my dislike of taking out the trash.

Or say that I want to take a vacation in Australia. I don't do it, though, because my desire to have that money in the bank is greater than my desire to vaca'.

Your thoughts?

 

[pgp_protector]

Exercise.

 

[dysert]

Exercise.

I presume you mean that you hate exercise but yet you do it. If that's the case, I'd submit that you like being healthy more than you hate doing the exercise.

I hate exercise, too, but I just don't do it. In my case, I hate exercise more than I want to be healthy.

We're still doing that which we like the most.

 

[brightlights]

It's definitely the case that desire is at the heart of all decision and behavior. We cannot choose or act without desire. Complex decisions involve multiple desires that seem to conflict. Determinists believe that your strongest desire will always win out and this is how complex decisions are made. Libertarians believe that there is a person overseeing the conflict and this person ultimately chooses which desire he will act upon, but it does not have to be the stronger one. At this point in my life I tend to side with determinists.

 

[quatona]

Here's a philosophical assertion that may not come as news to any of you, but I wonder if anyone disagrees with it? I say that everyone always does what they most want to do.

I basically agree with that. However, being silent about the circumstances, conditions and limitations the person in question finds herself in is likely to make the statement "she so wanted to..." pretty misleading.

For example, say I don't want to take out the trash, but at the same time I want my wife to like me. So, I take out the trash because the desire to have my wife like me is greater than my dislike of taking out the trash.

Yeah, that´s exactly what I mean: Saying "dysert most of all wants to take out the trash" would misrepresent you (after all, you explicitly said "I don´t want to take out the trash."
Thus, it´s not true that you do what you most want to do. Rather, you do what appears most promising to get you what you want to get. So what you do is not necessarily what you want to do most, but often just a means to an end.

 

[keith99]

So if I lose bowel and bladder control because there is a crazed gunman threatening everyone in may office I did that becaseu it was what I wanted to do!

I think not.

 

[The Engineer]

So if I lose bowel and bladder control because there is a crazed gunman threatening everyone in may office I did that becaseu it was what I wanted to do!

I think not.

This thread is about decision-making. Losing bladder control has nothing to do with decision-making, it's simply something that your body does.

Your argument doesn't work.

 

[Paradoxum]

Well it is probably true in some sense, but I don't think the phrase captures what is really going on.

It is likely more true that we have different levels of desires and feelings, some of which are consciously chosen goals and values, and some of which are subconscious and imposed upon the conscious mind. Also goals can be aimed at directly and indirectly.

 

[Beechwell]

But how do we know what we want most? Only by seeing how we are going to decide. So the thing we want most defined as whatever we are going to decide for. I don't think that helps us very much.
Although what might be interesting is examining the process by which we weigh our desires (which we arguably cannot control) against each other. Why is it that yesterday I was too lazy to do my exercise, yet today I managed to go for a run. Have my desires changed, or did my evaluation process to determine which one was more important change?

 

[sandwiches]

Seems like a little twist on the good ol' "There's no selfless act."

 

[dysert]

It's definitely the case that desire is at the heart of all decision and behavior. We cannot choose or act without desire. Complex decisions involve multiple desires that seem to conflict. Determinists believe that your strongest desire will always win out and this is how complex decisions are made. Libertarians believe that there is a person overseeing the conflict and this person ultimately chooses which desire he will act upon, but it does not have to be the stronger one. At this point in my life I tend to side with determinists.

I thought determinism (at least "hard" determinism) implied a bio-physical condition such that what we do has been programmed into us by the various stimuli we experience. This makes our "decisions" not really decisions at all but merely predictable responses devoid of free will?

 

[dysert]

I basically agree with that. However, being silent about the circumstances, conditions and limitations the person in question finds herself in is likely to make the statement "she so wanted to..." pretty misleading.

Yeah, that´s exactly what I mean: Saying "dysert most of all wants to take out the trash" would misrepresent you (after all, you explicitly said "I don´t want to take out the trash."
Thus, it´s not true that you do what you most want to do. Rather, you do what appears most promising to get you what you want to get. So what you do is not necessarily what you want to do most, but often just a means to an end.

I think you're right that we have to look at the long-term picture. Someone may see me practicing tennis every day and assume that I like to practice, where in fact my ultimate goal is to win an upcoming tournament. This could result in my doing what I really don't want to do (practice) for the *expectation* of realizing what I desire most (winning). If I don't win, then I'll have done the practice for nothing.

This would change my initial assertion to something like, "We always do what we think will bring us the most desired outcome". (Doesn't have a nice ring to it, but I think it's closer to being accurate.)

 

[dysert]

Well it is probably true in some sense, but I don't think the phrase captures what is really going on.

It is likely more true that we have different levels of desires and feelings, some of which are consciously chosen goals and values, and some of which are subconscious and imposed upon the conscious mind. Also goals can be aimed at directly and indirectly.

Yeah, I need to work on the phraseology. There may be subconscious stuff going on that I'm (obviously) not aware of. It doesn't negate the point, though, does it? I still end up doing what I most want to do, whether I'm aware of it or not.

 

[Paradoxum]

Yeah, I need to work on the phraseology. There may be subconscious stuff going on that I'm (obviously) not aware of. It doesn't negate the point, though, does it? I still end up doing what I most want to do, whether I'm aware of it or not.

Not really, it depends what you mean by 'I' and 'want'. If you identify them as the conscious mind and what the conscious mind purposely and directly aims at, then that phrase doesn't apply.

 

[dysert]

But how do we know what we want most? Only by seeing how we are going to decide. So the thing we want most defined as whatever we are going to decide for. I don't think that helps us very much.
Although what might be interesting is examining the process by which we weigh our desires (which we arguably cannot control) against each other. Why is it that yesterday I was too lazy to do my exercise, yet today I managed to go for a run. Have my desires changed, or did my evaluation process to determine which one was more important change?

So if I understand you, you're saying that our desires may not determine our actions but maybe the algorithm we use to generate those desires is what determines our actions? Doesn't that still lead to the same conclusion though? I mean, if my current algorithm makes me desire sitting on the couch more than running, I'll sit on the couch. The algorithm could change tomorrow (or perhaps better put, the inputs to the algorithm change) such that I'll then desire running instead. Seems like the same thing, though arrived at through different means.

 

[dysert]

Seems like a little twist on the good ol' "There's no selfless act."

Maybe so. Do you agree or disagree with that assertion?

(Btw, your screen name reminds me of an old joke: Why can't you starve at the beach? Because of all the sand which is there!)

 

[dysert]

Not really, it depends what you mean by 'I' and 'want'. If you identify them as the conscious mind and what the conscious mind purposely and directly aims at, then that phrase doesn't apply.

Hmm, so are you saying that we operate on two different levels, viz., the conscious and the unconscious? And so we might behave in a way that is driven by our unconscious desires at the expense of our conscious desires (or vice versa)? If that's the case, I wonder how it's determined which will "win" -- the conscious or unconscious? Can you think of an example that illustrates your point?

 

[quatona]

I think you're right that we have to look at the long-term picture. Someone may see me practicing tennis every day and assume that I like to practice, where in fact my ultimate goal is to win an upcoming tournament. This could result in my doing what I really don't want to do (practice) for the *expectation* of realizing what I desire most (winning).

Yes, means vs. ends.

If I don't win, then I'll have done the practice for nothing.

Which may, in retrospect, turn out to be a misconception (but that´s another topic).

This would change my initial assertion to something like, "We always do what we think will bring us the most desired outcome". (Doesn't have a nice ring to it, but I think it's closer to being accurate.)

Yes, that´s better.
Then again, it also doesn´t seem to do justice to the complexity of our wishes/desires/wants/needs, our behaviours and the link between those two.
E.g. sometimes I find myself ignoring those "ultimate long-term" goals in favour of doing that which I find immediately appealing - although fully being aware that it is conflicting with the "ultimate long-term" goals.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Here's a philosophical assertion that may not come as news to any of you, but I wonder if anyone disagrees with it? I say that everyone always does what they most want to do.

Personally, I disagree with you.

It's entirely possible for someone to do X when they feel a burning desire to do Y instead. One may argue that they had wanted to be lazy, but what if fear and self-doubt had been the cause? Did they really want to cave in to such forces? Or was there more of a kind of paralysis caused by a psychological inability to overcome those forces, perhaps due to a lack of inner strength?

I don't agree that we act simply on the basis of the strongest want. I'm not even certain that the strength of one's desires actually means all that much. While desires might suggest goals and provide motivations for acting on those goals, the prioritization of those goals in one's mind might not correspond in a strict way to the strengths of one's wants. One's judgment may have other ideas on how to make those prioritizations.

So, unless the strongest want is defined in hindsight (in a cheap tautological way) as "whatever motivated the resulting act", I don't think that it can be said that people always do what they most want to do.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[KCfromNC]

This thread is about decision-making. Losing bladder control has nothing to do with decision-making, it's simply something that your body does.

How about introducing the idea that many things we believe are conscious decisions are actually unconscious ones which we rationalize as decisions after the fact? Therefore our wants are not connected to the decision making in those cases at all, kind of like other unconscious responses to stimuli.