"Are all actions in life based on interest only"?

[Anomalocaris]

Conceptually possible set of action that does not occur in real life has no bearing on possible cause of actions which does actually occur.

[The Grand Nudger]

That may be the case. That while it's certainly possible for people to make decisions that are not return seeking..for whatever reason or no reason at all...we never do.

I suspect that would require a completely ludicrous explanation.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That may be the case.  That while it's certainly possible for people to make decisions that are not return seeking..for whatever reason or no reason at all...we never do.

I suspect that would require a completely ludicrous explanation.

The question was about actions, not decisions.

Boru

[emjay]

Maybe I'm missing the nuance here, but what about acting out of empathy to reduce another's suffering? It seems to me that that is neither transactional nor about feeling good about yourself, but rather just reducing or preventing something negative.

[Anomalocaris]

I don’t think empathy is about abstractly reducing the negative. It is fundamentally about establishing or sustaining a norm of behavior that would increase the chance that others would help reduce the negative when the negative happens to oneself.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

^There are sure cases where, even though personal benefit arises from an action, the action was not done to reap that benefit.

The essence of the OP was that we perform ALL actions out of self-interest, or an expectation of return. This is so clearly not the case that it almost seems pointless to belabour it. Suppose you find a wallet with a fair amount of cash in it. It’s perfect plausible that you wish to return the wallet for the sole purpose of returning it, without expecting or even thinking of a reward. You may receive a monetary thank you from the owner, but that’s beside the point.

Boru

[emjay]

I don’t think empathy is about abstractly reducing the negative. It is fundamentally about establishing or sustaining a norm of behavior that would increase the chance that others would help reduce the negative when the negative happens to oneself.

I was not meaning it in an abstract sense, but just generalising by using the word negative. Nor was I thinking about the global/social meaning of empathy but just the fact that for an individual, empathy allows you to understand or envisage another's suffering, and the mere thought of that is often unpleasant enough to drive action to reduce or prevent the imagined thing continuing/occurring.

[Anomalocaris]

I don’t think empathy is about abstractly reducing the negative.   It is fundamentally about establishing or sustaining a norm of behavior that would increase the chance that others would help reduce the negative when the negative happens to oneself.

I was not meaning it in an abstract sense, but just generalising by using the word negative. Nor was I thinking about the global/social meaning of empathy but just the fact that for an individual, empathy allows you to understand or envisage another's suffering, and the mere thought of that is often unpleasant enough to drive action to reduce or prevent the imagined thing continuing/occurring.

But why should we feel empathy, or feel uncomfortable with th suffering of another?    The answer is probably the presence of the propensity for empathy serves the individual in a community by enhancing the chance that collective effort will be devoted by the community to reducing the individual’s suffering.   Therefore the propensity has selfish value for the individual.

[emjay]

I was not meaning it in an abstract sense, but just generalising by using the word negative. Nor was I thinking about the global/social meaning of empathy but just the fact that for an individual, empathy allows you to understand or envisage another's suffering, and the mere thought of that is often unpleasant enough to drive action to reduce or prevent the imagined thing continuing/occurring.

But why should we feel empathy, or feel uncomfortable with th suffering of another?    The answer is probably the presence of the propensity for empathy serves the individual in a community by enhancing the chance that collective effort will be devoted by the community to reducing the individual’s suffering.   Therefore the propensity has selfish value for the individual.

Okay fair enough, that seems a reasonable theory, but just in terms of actual, conscious motives for action, it seems it is not transactional and/or related to self-worth even if it can be considered selfish at that more indirect/social propensity level as per your theory.

[John 6IX Breezy]

In evolutionary biology there are four common types of social behavior that get studied: Altruism, selfishness, mutual benefit, and spite.

Spite occurs when an animal harms itself in order to harm others.