Reducing human actions to the assessment of convenience/inconvenience is pragmatism and it's alienating. The organic-system model of homeostasis does not apply to ethical issues, it does not serve as an example for psychological issues. Arguing that human beings, ultimately, always act for convenience and in favor of their own survival is an organicist view, which hinders the understanding of life in common and justifies destructive behavior. The human actions that lead to organic stability correspond to biological immanence, to individual survival, but the human being is a survivor with the possibility of being more than that, the possibility of existing, that is, of being-in-the-world-here and now-with-others. Without the existential experience, he becomes dehumanized.
Human behavior is always exercised according to contexts, according to references. It is easily observable that organic, social, family and cultural references in general are the relational data that shape actions or shape behaviors. Adequacy to the reference systems is translated as well-being/discomfort, satisfaction, pleasure, dissatisfaction, displeasure and this, sequentially, formalizes experiences of successes, mistakes, purposes, nonsense, experiences that, by continuity, generate the concepts of convenient and profitable actions or inconvenient and harmful actions.
When life is organized based on goals or objectives to be achieved, pursuing results and focusing on the satisfaction of needs, the individual begins to map his own behavior looking for what is good, what is convenient and avoiding what is bad, what is inconvenient. By dwelling on the satisfaction of needs, he reduces his life processes to contingent results, thus losing perspectives of his infinite possibilities, since he transforms them into levers used to carry out his conveniences.
The realization of conveniences always require the use of others as objects, as points of support, i.e. as supports for building goals. Using labor necessary for building construction, for example, without it receiving its work value through adequate payment creates surplus value, consequently, it divides people into exploited and explorers. In affective exchanges, in family constellations, there are also processes that can be compared to added value. The creation of dependents, eternally grateful and disgusted, the use of parasites created as a maneuver mass and used to justify impediments and difficulties, show how the maintenance of convenience destroys users and the ones used in the intimate sphere of the family.
Defining oneself by what one seeks or what one avoids implies alienation caused by the motivation to seek what does not yet exist, consequently, to seek the impossible. There is no way to pursue inconvenience or dedicate yourself to it, and the same can be said of convenience, they are alienating values. Living to achieve or avoid, with this as the basis of behavior, dehumanizes and brings unhappiness.
To exist is to be in the world-here-and-now-with-others, and therefore, convenience can be agreement, consideration, motivation that creates autonomy and availability when reciprocally established and experienced, and this is totally different from the unilateral, appropriating and greedy experience of convenience resulting from the use of others out of fear, envy and usury. In these cases, the more you use it, the more you realize the conveniences, as well as the dependencies, disappointments, mistakes and betrayals.