Altruism is really a form of egoism

This topic arises from time to time in philosophical musings, so it is well worth debating. I appreciate Pro raising the topic, and I hope our debate will be interesting to the readers. 1. Contradiction. Pro stipulated that the entire definitions of "altruism" and "egoism" applied to this debate. Altruism is "Unselfish concern for the welfare of others" while egoism is "Excessive preoccupation with one's own well-being and interests." "Preoccupation" is defined as "when someone thinks or worries about something a lot, with the result that they do not pay attention to other things" http://www.ldoceonline.com... A person cannot be concerned with oneself to the exclusion of other things oneself while simultaneously being unselfishly concerned for others. Therefore, by definition altruism cannot be a form of egoism. 2. Counter-examples. Care for infants and children does not rest solely upon a person's self-perceived moral righteousness. We know this is so because infants are cared for universally, independent of varying cultural perceptions of self-righteousness and also by people who have no care for the opinions of others. Other perceptions of "righteousness" are culture-dependent, so it is clearly very strong instinctive behavior. The zoology definition acknowledges the instinct in other species, and the reasons for an altruistic instinct in humans is the same. Infants could not survive if not cared for, and so the instinct is necessary for the survival of the species. Pro claims that people behave altruistically wen they want "to be seen in a good moral light," but people also behave altruistically when there is no group watching. For example, if one person of a pair is injured on a hiking trip, te other person will go to get help. There are many accounts of such events, and people do not say they get help because they are worried about appearances, and no reason to suppose that they are. If it were as Pro supposes, then it would be revealed by injured companions who manage to survive without help, or by later confessions of the perpetrators. If Pro denies this claim, I challenge him to assert that he would fail to care for infant if he was sure no one would know of his negligence. 3. Separate instincts. Human are instinctively tribal. This fact is not controversial. "Tribalism has a very adaptive effect in human evolution. Humans are social animals, and ill-equipped to live on their own. Tribalism and ethnocentrism help to keep individuals committed to the group, even when personal relations may fray. ... Socially, divisions between groups fosters specialized interactions with others, based on association: altruism (positive interactions with unrelated members) kin-selectivity (positive interactions with related members), and violence (negative interactions)." http://en.wikipedia.org... There is also an individual instinct for self-preservation, expressed as egoism. Hence, altruism and egoism are forms of instinct. It is illogical to claim that if A is a subset of C and B is a subset of C, that A is a subset of C. For example, ducks and parakeets are forms of birds, but ducks are not a form of parakeets. "Altruism" and "egoism" are distinct. The distinction of the instincts is observed in nature. For example, in nature sand goby (fish) eat their young http://www.livescience.com..., and Humboldt squid are naturally cannibalistic http://www.nwf.org.... Note that there is another definition of altruism that Pro did not reference. "The term 'altruism' may also refer to an ethical doctrine that claims that individuals are morally obliged to benefit others. Used in this sense, it is the opposite of egoism." http://en.wikipedia.org... This also contradicts Pro's contention, but since he didn't reference it, it doesn't apply to the debate. The reason I mention it is to point out that affirming that altruism exists does not affirm or deny any claim about altruism as an ethical doctrine. Negating the resolution does not affirm altruism as a doctrine. This may be confusing as Pro did reference "egoism" as an ethical doctrine in his definition. The resolution is negated.