#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=896x952&blurhash=%7B38gy--%3BIUWB9FM%7BD%25M%7B9F%25M%25MWBt7j%5BofWB9F%25Mxut7xut7t7ayxut7j%5BWBfQayWBRjofxut7ayayfQfQWB_3WBWBRjM%7BayRjj%5Bof%25MfQWBayRjofRjIUt7t7j%5BWBayWBj%5B%7EqWBRjj%5BRjj%5BRjj%5B&x=2ce4c2295e6d04a59f0bb68e4ec16729cd3bcd532cac285038658947334115c5
I maintain that all voluntary acts are selfish in the sense that they would not do the act if they didn't feel it was the best of available choices that would bring them the most personal satisfaction (or least dissatisfaction) - especially the giving of one's life for another
Discussion
I don't think you've addressed my three points:
1. Dead people can't experience satisfaction.
2. Your argument is based on magical godlike knowledge*.
3. Selfishness isn't relevant.
* keep in mind that the reason Mises argued against knowing other people's subjective value judgements is that it is often used to justify utilitarian attempts to even out everyone's subjective experience AKA communism
I guess it depends on how you define "true" altruism as stated by Max. I took it to mean "unselfish." So I still maintain that there is no voluntary unselfish act. I cannot read people's minds but I can tell a lot by their actions.
I would further define a "selfish act" as "any act that one perceives to be beneficial to one's self in any given situation."
I think "doing good because it feels good" is exactly the situation that the word "altruism" was invented for.
But we're really just talking about semantics at this point. We can agree to disagree.