Classic statement in philosophy there is no such thing as a selfless Act

I don't believe that true altruism exists because I am of the belief that intrinsic rewards count as benefits but I also don't believe that just because one gets a reward for an act means they are selfish.

If someone chooses to save a life, they do it instinctively not because they are seeking a reward. From personal experience, I performed CPR once and I did it with only the thought that someone needed help and I was in the position to render aid. Only after the person began breathing and the many F bombs that followed that I felt rewarded. There wasn't a thought of right or wrong. Quite frankly, because of the environment I was in and not having a face mask, I could have chosen not to do it and no one would have blamed me.

maybe you're confusing cause and effect. maybe a man saves someone from altruism and the result is that he feels good about himself but that wasn't why he did it. maybe a mother takes care of her child because she truly loves the child, and then she enjoys being needed but that's not why she took care of her child. there is an awful lot of assumption going on in your premise.

g

We tend to give greater weight to the consequences of an action when we try to evaluate them morally. The intentions do matter but if you do good deeds it is mostly regarded as good even if you only have your benefit in mind.

Rational self interest is a meta-abstraction that explains even "selflessness" and self-sacrifice. It is, basically, empathy for your future self -- the ability to feel good about short term personal deprivation because you imagine benefits for you down the road, such as the ability to point to a great accomplishment against all odds, or simply to live with yourself knowing you've done what you see as the right thing.