Wrong.
Selfishness is more basic, as with fear you're still GIVING something to someone.
With selfishness, you're giving nothing.
And hand in hand with selfishness is hate.
You're still trying to sidestep this dance.
And you're getting tangential.
I answered your question, you don't like the answers.
"as with fear you're still GIVING something to someone."
You can fear the presence of something but fear itself does not give the presence of anything other than a reaction.
If fear leads to hate which leads to evil than you are giving someone a
wound (evil act).
You would have to rephrase it: as with fear you're still GIVING something to someone.
If it's just fear than you would have to claim that someone who is afraid will always fight and will never hide (hiding means being away from people while not giving them anything) What definition of fear are you using? I was refering to reactionary stimuli. Is there another definition of fear?
If by selfish you mean doing what's good for the self then:
"With selfishness, you're giving nothing."
yes you are, you're giving something to yourself.
"And hand in hand with selfishness is hate."
Not if you love yourself. That's selfish and it's not hate. It's love of self. You can love yourself and others at the same time right? There's also another flaw in your objection. If selfishness is giving nothing and selfishness goes hand in hand with hate, than how can hate ever lead to giving damage to the object of hate? If something is NOT GIVING than it is either TAKING or DOING NOTHING. If it exists than it is doing something, it's existing. note: creating is giving one piece to another
Since selfishness exists, as you state, we may assume that it does not involve doing nothing. Absolute, primal selfishness would be absolute nothingness which is non-existence.
That would mean that hate is taking in (consumption). How can that be? For example, a Kluxer can be hateful but he doesn't necessarily want to consume and "take" cultures that he hates. He wants to segregate. Separate them away from himself.
"I answered your question, you don't like the answers."
You're right, I like debate, it's more interesting. I can debate with you as long as a perfect argument your statement does not make. Telling me again that i'm not thinking or that I don't know an answer when I see one will only show that you lack the power to be convincing. Even the lack of ability to not convince a fool is still a lack of ability.
NOTE TO DARKSHEARE: ATTACK MY PREMISES IF YOU WANT TO WIN THE DEBATE
NOTE 2: This is a learning opportunity for both of us