17 replies to this topic

[asrael]

Okay, first i'll provide some background as to why i want to hold this discussion, that is if people still roam this section.

Last weekend i discussed Altruism with a few friends of mine out of boredom and i came to the conclusion that this debate, which i've had with other people too, is based mainly on peoples definitions of Altruism.

So i'd love to know:

What do you think Altruism is. (Definitions, not random examples : >)
Do you think it exists in the human or animal kingdom

Also, do you believe in reciprocity? What do you think drives this?

[doctorfunk]

Yesterday I saw short vid on TED.com with Anthony Robbins(life coach or smth like that) and he claimed, that need of giving/contributing is one of 6 basic human needs. If I understood his theory correctly people help even strangers because it makes them feel good.. He didn't go any deeper than that on this subject- but the theory is sound imo. There is a need in people to contribute to society in one way or another.

my definition of altruism is giving something without expecting anything back
i believe it exists in human kingdom
i don't believe it exists in animal kingdom(i believe animals are driven by instinct not emotions and that they are not sentient)

I do believe in it, in a way it's like crazy circle of reciprocity; whenever someone does something nice for you, you feel happy(at least i do, maybe as little as compliment or friendly smile) and I sort of want to be nicer to others too.

[asrael]

I do agree with the part that helping people, be it strangers or friends, makes you feel good. However, this touches yet does not answer my original question, which i'll expand to this specific statement:

Do you think that this would count as altruism? In my 6 months as a Psych. minor student i've heard a lot of people claim it was, though I strongly disagree.

*edit*

my definition of altruism is giving something without expecting anything back
i believe it exists in human kingdom
i don't believe it exists in animal kingdom(i believe animals are driven by instinct not emotions and that they are not sentient)

That is a definition that does require the reciprocity principle.
However, that would imply that altruism touches 'selflessness' in a sense, yet I agree that giving to strangers/charities is truly selfless.

The definition i take, which comes from biology (ghehe), is that altruism is the act of proving 'advantages' to others whilst this act does not provide any beneficial or negative effect for yourself.

In that sense, i do not believe that altruism truly exists in both the human and animal kingdom: It's never without any effect on yourself.

However, i do believe in reciprocity in both kingdoms

Edited by asrael, 24 May 2012 - 01:17 PM.

[doctorfunk]

Well perhaps that definition needs an upgrade then
Besides it's possible to to help someone without having a negative impact on yourself;
like give 1% of your taxes to charities- you are going to lose that 1% anyways, so helping the charity/organization will have 0 effect on your money resources.
IN pOland we have a tax law like that, you may give 1% of your tax to some organization

[asrael]

Does it? If you update it you basically change it into symbiotic theories, which would abolish the need for the altruism theory and deny its existence in a way.

That is true, but i was not talking solely about negative effects.

As you've stated, giving makes you feel good. Assuming this is so for the majority of people this raises the questions:

Would you consider only material effects?

And if no,

Does 'feeling good' count as beneficial?

Edited by asrael, 24 May 2012 - 01:23 PM.

[doctorfunk]

It could use an upgrade for example because it does not state what this stuff labelled "beneficial" or "advantages" include, If I feel good did I just gain the advantage?

haha exactly my question

Well Niels, I'd still name human need to give "altruism". Whether you name it something else is just a matter of semantics. Fact is that many people have natural need to give and share, so I guess you could say most people have some good in them

[asrael]

That depends on which person you ask.

I do believe that something that makes you feel good also has direct advantages, since i believe that 'mental health' is quite important for your 'physical health', thus even these small things provide an advantage.

[doctorfunk]

people have that need in them and it's pretty much biologically useless, so it's really not important how you name it.

[asrael]

It really does depend on semantics wether you say claim it to be a 'human need' and 'biologically useless'. Most 'altruistic' deeds described in the animal kingdom are basically genetically driven fitness advantages.

But okay, let's assume it is a need and neccesity.

What happens with the group of people that do not feel the need to do good for others, being psychopaths and such.

[doctorfunk]

Asreal thing about people is that they can go beyond genetic fitness advantages. Animals will sacrifice themselves only to preserve their genetic material like their progeny(at least all the examples I know of). People seem somehow more complex, because they can sacrifice themselves for an idea; like kamikaze pilots. Hardly a fitness advantage for a kamikaze pilot to kill himself and discontinue his genetic line. However it could be considered an act of altruism on his part ;p

Also another problem i have with that definition is why altruism can't bring you anything negative???!!! If you wanna be bitch about it, you could argue that everything has an effect, so that definition is somehow limiting.

Perhaps it is a bitch way of some biologist to say that there is no altruism.
But frankly I wouldn't be surprised if psychologist/philosophers could provide a more fitting and satisfying definitions of altruism.

[asrael]

It would surprise how much people are driven by these, rather ancient, urges still. It's a quite arrogant to think that we're that much differentiated from 'the rest'.
Also, for the kamikaze pilot, however indirect, it's comparable to 'acts of altruism' as observed by alarm calls in the animal kingdom as such. However less 'sure' as a kamikaze, it greatly increases the chance that you'll die as you'll draw the attention on yourself. Why, do you think, this is still a widely observed phenomenon?

PS: I'd advise you to watch Desmon Morris' documentiaries on human behaviour. It's quite mind-expanding in a way.

I would be surprised if psychologists could, Doc. But that's probably because i hardly have any faith in psychology.
Plus, what makes you a philosopher? Graduating in philosophy?

Edited by asrael, 24 May 2012 - 01:52 PM.

[doctorfunk]

I would be surprised if psychologists could, Doc. But that's probably because i hardly have any faith in psychology.
Plus, what makes you a philosopher? Graduating in philosophy?

talk about arrogance

[asrael]

I do not disagree with you on that part lol.

But anyway, i'm going to step aside and see if anyone else wants to share his opinion. This is becoming a bit stale

[HEIHACHI]

C-C-C-COMBO BREAK

lol anyways, in my opinion altruism doesn't exist amongst humans because every human was born to competitive world, and every ''generous thing'' people do are just show-offs of generousity. I mean - if you do a nice thing to other person, like picking him up from somewhere etc, you get satisfied feeling inside, and feel like your helpful. If people who do nice stuff say like: i don't need anything back from my help, they mean like they don't currently need anything, but if they get into hard situation in future, they expect you to help them, or atleast feels like they are rightful to expect that. Only problem to my statement is the feeling Love. Because if your in love you might do lot of shit to other human/ dog / other creatures, just because you love it..

sorry for my bad english... im in shallow waters from this moby dick :DDD

[Activee]

Altruism is the fact to be really nice with someone action wise. I actually use this word more with a sarcastic sens when I use it. Like a friend did something that seemed really nice for me but he actually thought about his own benefit while doing it. I'll say like I didn't know you were that much altruist. Idk how to explain but I think you got it


Does it exist ? Hum I think when anyone does something he does it for his own good intentionaly or not. So at his deepest that cannot exist
(except maybe for apoptosis )s

so in order for this word to have a goal I think not the reasons of an act but the act itself can tell if one is altruist or not. For example stealing candy in a store isn't altruist.
If one day some pyscho comes to an house where a mother and her kid live and say : ok momy you have to cut yourself a finger else I kill this baby. She will do it , she is altruist. But deeply her reasons still are for herself.

Yesterday I saw short vid on TED.com with Anthony Robbins(life coach or smth like that) and he claimed, that need of giving/contributing is one of 6 basic human needs. If I understood his theory correctly people help even strangers because it makes them feel good..

I don't know if I even made sens there lol tell me if this was totally retarded

Edited by Activee, 24 May 2012 - 06:42 PM.

[maniman]

Imo altruism is a big part of mankind
Take a look at your own family and the fact you would do everything for them without ever expecting something back. Its still altruism. The same goes for a nation in someway. And did you never gave money to the homeless before? Its altruism. Or do you expect a blowjob?

Also takes place in the animal kingdom. Animals that live in groups share alot and they really dont care for returns. They just do, I think its part of their instinct.

I think coming together as people, or for animals. Giving and sharing without expectations of eachother is what is needed for progress and it even takes place in cooperation world.

How about Netherlands - Bayern munchen?

Can someone teach me what the fuck reciprocity is?

[malign]

I have not read the whole thread.....

Altruism as defined by this post: Helping others without any DIRECT reason.

A direct reason could be: (a) a priori circumstances which steer you in the way of helping somebody. This could be you are forced to help someone, because you might get killed otherwise(Gun on your head). ( No immediate reward or punishment, if you help you get a cookie in return or if you do not help you will get grounded (think of helping mommy )

So it's not altruism when there's a direct reason involved. Direct reasons are (a) and (, if (a) and ( occur it's no altruism therefore.

So what is it?
Helping others, without a direct reason. I do include ultimate egocentric motives and I will try to give a few examples.

Let's start with the notion that men are a social animal. Please remind yourself this is all based on logic with premisses from an evolutionairy perspective
1) We need to survive
2) Living in a group has increased our survival
Conclusion: living in a group partly fulfills a need (the need for survival)

3) Fulfilling needs makes us feel good
conclusion: Living in a group thus feels good

4) Helping others increases of being accepted in a group
5) being accepted in a group increases chances of living in a group
conclusion: helping others increases chances of living in a group and thus fulfilling a need and making us feel good.

This was logic to explain why helping relatives and friends is vital.

But what about donating to charity? Donating to charity can have multiple explanations(just as the above mentioned logic could have had way more explanations)
Let's name a few examples: Fear for doing bad or fulfilling your moral tendencies.

1) You are taught that giving to the poor is good
2) Not giving to the poor is heartless and selfish.
3) Being heartless and selfish is rejectable.
4) You don't want to be rejected by people, since you want to be part of the group(remember above theory? )
5) You give to avoid being heartless and selfish(this can have consequences for you)

A more positive idea:
You like giving because you see yourself as a giving person, who cares about others. Giving will reinforce that pleasant idea of you and will boost your state.

I can write way more about this, but it's just too THEORETICAL and the answer is DEBATABLE.

The reason why I used those numbers and conclusions is because I want you to arrive at the point while following the correct mode of thought, so it's more clear for you. I am not a philosophy student however, those people are way better at doing that.

[asrael]

Also takes place in the animal kingdom. Animals that live in groups share alot and they really dont care for returns. They just do, I think its part of their instinct.

I think coming together as people, or for animals. Giving and sharing without expectations of eachother is what is needed for progress and it even takes place in cooperation world.

Can someone teach me what the fuck reciprocity is?

No. Animals do not share if it does not directly or indirectly improves their fitness benefits. This is the reason why kin selection takes place.
Reciprocity basically means: I give you something, you'll give me something aswell.

I have not read the whole thread.....

Altruism as defined by this post: Helping others without any DIRECT reason.

A direct reason could be: (a) a priori circumstances which steer you in the way of helping somebody. This could be you are forced to help someone, because you might get killed otherwise(Gun on your head). ( No immediate reward or punishment, if you help you get a cookie in return or if you do not help you will get grounded (think of helping mommy )

So it's not altruism when there's a direct reason involved. Direct reasons are (a) and (, if (a) and ( occur it's no altruism therefore.

So what is it?
Helping others, without a direct reason. I do include ultimate egocentric motives and I will try to give a few examples.

Let's start with the notion that men are a social animal. Please remind yourself this is all based on logic with premisses from an evolutionairy perspective
1) We need to survive
2) Living in a group has increased our survival
Conclusion: living in a group partly fulfills a need (the need for survival)
3) Fulfilling needs makes us feel good
conclusion: Living in a group thus feels good

4) Helping others increases of being accepted in a group
5) being accepted in a group increases chances of living in a group
conclusion: helping others increases chances of living in a group and thus fulfilling a need and making us feel good.

This was logic to explain why helping relatives and friends is vital.

But what about donating to charity? Donating to charity can have multiple explanations(just as the above mentioned logic could have had way more explanations)
Let's name a few examples: Fear for doing bad or fulfilling your moral tendencies.

1) You are taught that giving to the poor is good
2) Not giving to the poor is heartless and selfish.
3) Being heartless and selfish is rejectable.
4) You don't want to be rejected by people, since you want to be part of the group(remember above theory? )
5) You give to avoid being heartless and selfish(this can have consequences for you)

A more positive idea:
You like giving because you see yourself as a giving person, who cares about others. Giving will reinforce that pleasant idea of you and will boost your state.

I can write way more about this, but it's just too THEORETICAL and the answer is DEBATABLE.

The reason why I used those numbers and conclusions is because I want you to arrive at the point while following the correct mode of thought, so it's more clear for you. I am not a philosophy student however, those people are way better at doing that.

You're such a psychologist :<.
Being 'rejected' is an insanely human concept.

First: It's not altruism if theres a DIRECT or INDIRECT reason involved. There is NO difference between direct and indirect advantages besides semantics.
Also, living in a group does not increase your survival per se. If living in a group causes competition for food, it decreases your individual chance of survival.

I'll try to look more into your statements when i'm sober...

Edited by asrael, 24 May 2012 - 09:47 PM.