1)I agree with you. But if you examine human behaviors you will see our main goal is always satisfy ourselves. You said yourself you feel joy when you see a smile on a child´s face. But you don´t feel any joy when you see a smile on a serial killer´s face. So you choose people you want to help. This is egoist. A serial killer is a human too. And his smile is not different from a child´s smile. If he is in jail, there is no obstacle to help him and make him smile. Because if you want to make  a bad person good one you must help him. I am sure Jesus would approve this. You can see a lot of serial killers or rapers became good Christian believers in prisons. There are priests in prisons also helping criminals. So it is a moral thing to help them. According to common ethics you should not choose people you want to help.

2) You say you have never hated anyone who hurt your ego. Let me prove you are wrong with your words. You talk like you hate or don´t like serial killers? Have you ever asked yourself why? Because they hurt your ego.There are two types of ego. One is the normal ego, other is super ego. The superego is the aspect of personality that holds all of our internalized moral standards and ideals that we acquire from both parents and society--our sense of right and wrong. The superego provides guidelines for making judgments. According to Freud, the superego begins to emerge at around age five.(1) So we can say superego is a representative of society in ourselves. A serial killer´s crimes challenges our superego. We don´t accept them because we are taught they are bad. So we don´t like serial killers. Generally we hate them. Because thinking their crimes makes us sad and scared. They challenge our super ego. But you know soldiers also can kill a lot of people. But you don´t hate them. You love them.Why? Because you are taught they are the people who protect you. You think they will never harm you. You trust them. This pleases your superego.

3) So everything is about ego. Freud saw these and called humans evil or bad by nature. But i don´t agree with him. Being egoist is not always a bad thing.

(1)http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/personalityelem.htm

I want to say something. You are objecting me with the arguments which my inner voice objected me. It is very interesting to hear same objections. I also objected myself with these arguments but i convinced myself. Hope i will convince you too. Bye.

And please read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning

 If you do an action to satisfy yourself it is selfish. But sometimes you can´t know if an action will satisfy yourself or not. You can only decide whether it is satisfying or not after you acted. If the result is satisfying you will go on doing this action.Because you will want to feel this satisfying or pleasure again. This is called operant conditioning by Skinner. So the intention is important. But most of the time we know whether an action will satisfy and make us happy or not. And we do an action to satisfy ourselves. This is egoism. But it is not an evil thing always. Read the posts above i explained this.

 Most of the time we hate people who challenges  our ego. We can easily hate people when they don´t agree with us or criticize us. Because they defy our ego. You say you feel joy when  you see a hungry child smile and don´t feel joy when you see a crazy child killer smile. As i said you want to feel joy when you help someone in return. So you help people to feel that joy.This is egoist. But it is not a bad thing. I call this positive egoism. I am defending it. But Kant says you must help people for the sake of helping. He says this is the moral one. And according to common ethics he says the truth. But i don´t defend this kind of idea. I am defending positive egoism. We should help the people we love or pity and have pleasure in return. There is nothing wrong with this. We are egoist creatures. And egoism is not always an evil thing. I called humans evil creatures according to common ethics. Because egoism is evil according to it. But good and evil is relative. I am trying to show egoism is not always a bad thing.

All the big artists,inventors, scientists are egoist people. Because they followed their ideas by not paying attention to public opinion.Their whole purpose was creating or discovering something new. Because only this way they would be happy. As you see their egoism was positive.

Most of the time doing an act because of social duty is an selfless act because you give something but  in return you take nothing. Maybe you feel pain. But you bear it because of social duty. This is an selfless act. But you can also feel happy when you give someone something because of social duty. This is an selfish act too. Because you take some kind of pleasure.

Nobody can force you to do your social duty if it is not a law. And most of people prefer not to do it. But some do it. Because they feel they are obliged to do it. And they take no pleasure in return. This is pure selfless act. But if the person thinks other people will celebrate him/her in return if he/she does his social duty it is selfish too.

For example most of the people send their old parents to nursing homes. But some of them take care of them even they don´t want and it is unbearable. Because they think it is a social duty to take care of them. This is an selfless act.

But i don´t approve this kind of selfless act. Because you don´t want to help them. But you feel you are obliged to. I dont find it is sincere. I aprove the selfish act. You should take care of them if you want, you shouldn´t take care of them if you don´t want. This is more honest.

 Good point. But you should understand this we help people only we want to help. This is selfish. Nobody helps the people they hate. Why? Because in return they feel pain or they don´t feel anything. People only help people who they will have pleasure in return. It is an selfish act. Do you understand me?

 I dont know maybe Kant defend this but i dont defend it. I dont defend helping people for the sake of help. Because then you shouldn´t help the people you love or you pity. Because you will take pleasure if you help them. In this situation you should only help the people you hate or you don´t know. But this can cause a destruction in society. Because our first duty should be helping the people we love or pity. So i defend we must help others for the sake of pleasure we feel after helping. So we should be egoists. Only that way we can help who we want to help. I am defending egoism and immorality. Because they are more constructive and useful.

 I help others because i am an egoist. I am doing it for myself to take some kind of pleasure.I think there are two kind of egoism. One is positive, one is negative. Positive one is constructive and creative, negative one is harmful and destructive. I am a positive egoist like you. And i am immoral

 I started thinking about egoism after i had read Ayn Rand´s works. And these ideas came to my mind. Then i read the Will Durant´s The Story Of Philosophy. And i found Kant´s ideas about this matter.I took only this social duty term from Kant. I have never read any of Kant´s works. But i will soon. We are thinking same way i guess. But i don´t think Kant defends egoism. I am defending it. Because Ayn Rand effected me very much.

 You take pleasure when you help. You feel proud, you feel good, it keep your mind and soul alive. So you take pleasure. And you want to help more people because of taking this pleasure. So you are helping people for yourself. This is egoism. But as i said i don´t think egoism is always a bad thing. It can be a good thing too. But common ethics blame you of being evil(selfish) if you do something to please yourself. We must redefine ethics.

I think humans are evil creatures. Because i believe all of us are egoists by nature. Yes some of us help others or make favors. But i believe these are selfish acts too. Because in return we take some kind of pleasure. And this pleasure makes us more helpful. But it doesn´t make us less selfish. We help people to take this selfish pleasure. So our favors don´t depend on a moral basis but they depend on a selfish and immoral basis. A moral act must only depend to a social duty and we should not feel pleasure or anything in return of this act. Then we can say it is moral. All of us help the people we love but only a few of us help the people we hate. And it is logical but immoral because it is selfish.We take pleasure in return. We give something but we take pleasure. It is like a trade. And it is two sided. But a real moral act must be only one sided. You have to give something and get nothing in return. If you examine the people you call evil you can see they help the people they love too. So this proves helping the people you love isn´t a very high moral principal. It is very common.

I want to give an example:

When you give someone some money you can feel three emotions in return

a) some kind of a pleasure because you like or pity that person(selfish)

b)both pleasure and pain because you like or pity that person but you are now in a bad situation because you gave your money (selfish)

c)only pain because you gave money because you felt you were obliged to give it because of the social duty (unselfish)

a is selfish because we take pure pleasure in return. b is also selfish because pain and pleasure balance themselves. We are bearing the pain because of the pleasure. c is unselfish because we have pain in return. We are bearing this pain because we feel it is our ethic duty. We don´t take any pleasure in return. And there is another possibility when we give money to someone and it is "not to feel" anything. It is also moral because you give but take nothing in return. It is like the Budhist or Jedi way

I don´t say you "do not to help the people you love". Because i help them too. But i want you to know that this can be a selfish act according to your situation. As all of you know selfishness or egoism are evil according to our common  ethics. So we humans are evil creatures. But i believe being selfish is not an evil thing as long as you don´t harm others for your purposes.

So what do you think?