Isn't that selfishness?
Sometimes being selfish is a good thing.I mean....
But....I dunno, give me a week and I will come up with a good counter.
So you mean that one cannot carry others without first strengthening themselves?Sometimes being selfish is a good thing.
Morally speaking, we humans are usually only moral from a prism.
If we give up that prism morality doesn't do any good.
If we would truly be unselfish then we would give up everything we own and ignore all of our own ambition as well.
And that would be inhumane, and not lead anywhere.
In fact, it would probably corrupt us turn us into monsters, and let evil take over.
But if people are selfish then other people learn to deal with the fact that life doesn't always give them what they want and people start to struggle to achieve greatness and make progress.
And through that prism there is still room for morality.
There is nothing wrong with Itachi preserving his honor, his social appearance, instead of living as a known criminal he could let the evil unfold but be known as an honorable decent civilian.
That would not put Sasuke into shame or confusion and it wouldn't hurt anyone that he preserves his own social acceptance.
The fact that he became known as a criminal but under the guise of being good only causes confusion and might inspire people to themselves become criminals because the social appearance starts to dimish in value.
This also meant he was cut off from any conversation and had to resort to threats to make his point clear ala his torture of Sasuke and his message to Danzo.
But if he had remained his honor he would still be someone that people could talk to and have a conversation with that could lead somewhere.
This it would be selfish but it would be beneficial for others and not just himself also.
hmm.So you mean that one cannot carry others without first strengthening themselves?
In the case of Itachi (or FOR Itachi?), does the path you explained not involve discounting his feelings duty towards the village, which in turn acts against himself, which in turn goes against the idea of a fully selfish decision?
"for the sake of morality" implies against his own wishes.hmm.
He did care about the village, but also if he realized it would be better to let the village potentially burn for the sake of morality.
Then this would be in the long term a better decision for himself.
So it would still be a selfish decision cus he could realize it would benefit him more. It wouldn't be what he directly wanted but it would be what was best for him.
Not always but in this particular case what he thinks is best - wiping out the clan, is not the best move. And its not the best move for him."for the sake of morality" implies against his own wishes.
The reasoning of your second paragraph implies that doing the right thing, seeking greater good is always selfish, then. Or do you mean to say that it simply carries elements of self-benefit?
Overall, you think morality and selfishness are not opposites?