First, do you agree with what has been call the theory of rational self-interest, namely: That human choice/intention can be characterized in terms of a description of self in relation to a project, where a project is either an end or means to a practical end that the individual desires. That project can either a project solely of the will (e.g. I hope Geoff agrees with me) or outside the will (e.g. I will write this post so that he does). All of the later types contain or can be written to contain one of the “being” verbs, where the subject of the verb is the individual willing. All of the former can also be written such, (i.e., I will hope…, I am hoping…, etc.). Thus even the most selfless acts include this personal dimension that makes them acts of the individual. Furthermore, that the ends of human willing are specific and practical. For example, projects are chosen for the sake of conformity intellect and reality, for the sake of conformity of what one communicates to others and one's intellect, for the sake of friendship (what I would call human intimacy), for the sake of play, for the sake of life, etc. These are not only personal goods, but also things that you can desire for another. Thus I will write this article for the mutual conformation of our intellects to reality.
Now, to take a normative step, do you have any objection to this: Because these are the natural and common ends of human action, when we in the ordinary course of our lives must make choices about ourselves and others, we ought to pursue these ends for others as for ourselves?