More on the topic of selfishness, generosity and symbiosis

The other day I looked at the view point that content consumers can be said to be generous, whereas those who produce the content on the opposite can be regarded as selfish, and I did this very much with my focus on the selfish creators.
But it is at least as interesting to look at the generous consumers - because is it true: are the consumers always so generous?
In a sense, yes. All people who consume the content that I have created, I have to at least acknowledge that they generously spend their time on me. That's why I like to return to the story of Adam Grant and Daniel Pink in the backyard: in this world, where time is often considered our most precious resource, we waste people's resources if anything we have created makes them spend time that they could have used better elsewhere. (And if I let people's resources go to waste in that way, I have to consider any wish I have that they read my creations to be selfish).
But of course there are more or less generous consumers. As soon as the consumer begins to relate to the content and provide feedback, the level of generosity increases. I agree that the generosity of the keyboard warriors (who just use the creators' posts as a starting point to bring forward their own more or less off-topic conspiratory assumptions) is of such a limited extend that we would be better off without it. But the closer to the subject the given feedback is - and the more constructive inspiration, the creator can get out of it - the more generously the consumer acts towards the creator. This is perfectly obvious in situations where sequences of comments develop into mutually inspiring conversations, but even a single click on a Like-button can be seen as generosity - as the consumer hereby gives an expression of the type "more of the same kind, please".
For the same reason, I prefer five dedicated readers than 5000 that I hardly notice are there - because I, along with the five dedicated ones, can share much more symbiotic generosity in our common interest.
(Translated from Mere om egoisme, generøsitet og symbiose)

On the topic of selfishness, generosity and symbiosis

Once again, my dear friend Rebecca Elvy made me think - this time by putting forward the observation that "consuming content is at least as much an act of generosity as creating it. In fact, creating content is somewhat selfish. But it can't be completely selfish, because you share it..."
 After giving it some thought, I guess you could call those who create content selfish, as most creators do it because they live with some inner force that drives them to create the content; they simply have to create it, regardless of whether it is of interest to others or not, in order to satisfy this inner force. But in other ways it is selfless - because creators put their creations out there for us consumers to consume it (sometimes with a price tag, but the consumers accept that the content is much more valuable than what the creator demands to get for it).
But I think the most fruitful way point of view us to creators and consumers as being parts in a symbiotic relationship - at it's best, creators might create their content without having an audience in mind, but still most creators thrive on the feedback from the consumers; the consumers, on the other hand thrive on the content of the creators and offer their feedback in return - thereby creating a feedback loop which makes both creators and consumers better than they would be on their own - for which reason both the creators and the consumers are happy that the other part exists and spends time and energy on keeping the circuit alive. It is mutual inspiration at its best - and both creators and consumers see the other part as being generous, because both parts bring something to their common good. And either part consider herself the selfish one, because she benefits from her counterpart's generosity.
The trick is to seek these fruitful relations - because I recognise that there are other, less fruitful creator-consumer relationships out there, where each part tries to benefit as much as possible from the other part's generosity. The trick is to replace the "what's in it for me"-mindset with that of "I'm in it for you".
(Translated from Noget om egoisme, generøsitet og symbiose)

The wolf we feed

They say that inside all of us, we carry with us two wolves who fight each other. One represents negative things such as anger, envy, sorrow, regret, arrogance, self pity, guilt, hatred, lies, doubt and egoism, whereas the other represents positive things such as faith, hope, love, peach, humility, friendliness, empathy, generosity and truth.
And the question, which wolf will win the fight, is quite easily answered - so easily that it requires no further explanation. The wolf you feed will win.
So let this be a call to action for all of us. Let's feed our positive wolf. Make room for and nurture faith, hope, love, peach, humility, friendliness, empathy, generosity and truth.
Because all of us benefit from other people feeding their positive wolf.
And because we to our surroundings are a part of all of those, who should feed the positive wolf for other people to benefit from it.
(Translated from Den ulv, vi fodrer, originally published May 31st, 2017)