Altruism

[koalabear]

No there isn't.

An altruistic act is one which benefits only another ie. a completely selfless act.

However, an individual performing such an act will know they are acting in the interests of another, and gain from that act a feeling of pride or pleasure at their own selflessness.

Thus they also benefit from it.

Which means it's no longer altruism.

 

[joe-90]

True altruism means to commit a selfless act at the detriment of yourself - but it doesn't exist.

In wartime there are a number of cases of soldiers throwing themselves on top of enemy hand grenades to save the lives of the group. That sounds like altruism but they wouldn't do the same action to save the lives of their enemy which means that other factors are involved as explained (very well ) be JohnD.

 

[2scoops0406]

No there isn't.

An altruistic act is one which benefits only another ie. a completely selfless act.

However, an individual performing such an act will know they are acting in the interests of another, and gain from that act a feeling of pride or pleasure at their own selflessness.

Thus they also benefit from it.

Which means it's no longer altruism.

Totally correct, to mind mind true altruism doesn't exist.

i.e. Mother Teresa, was no doubt a saint to the poor in india (interestingly, though I think she was Bulgarian) but that said, what she did, she did for God, no doubt hoping for some recognition when she reached the pearly gates, not truly atruistic

 

[JohnD]

I've heard the view (and i am not a trained philospher) that doing good works out of obedience or discipline, or on the instructions of, or to obtain the approval of, a higher power, does not give moral value to your actions.

if your boss was Pol Pot, your absolute obedience would lead you to do very terrible things (and this often happens


"I was only obeying orders"

p.s. I place no faith in people who claim God told them to do it... whether it's invading Iraq or murdering prostitutes or playing a tuba.

 

[Shutpa]

No there isn't.

An altruistic act is one which benefits only another ie. a completely selfless act.

However, an individual performing such an act will know they are acting in the interests of another, and gain from that act a feeling of pride or pleasure at their own selflessness.

Thus they also benefit from it.

Which means it's no longer altruism.

Totally correct, to mind mind true altruism doesn't exist.

i.e. Mother Teresa, was no doubt a saint to the poor in india (interestingly, though I think she was Bulgarian) but that said, what she did, she did for God, no doubt hoping for some recognition when she reached the pearly gates, not truly atruistic

I really think that you are doing a great disservice to those who are more concerned with the needs of others than with their own. Your assumptions on the reasons behind Mother Teresa's altruistic work in particular, are simply assumptions and nothing more. How you could, to prove a point, accuse her of having selfish aims, I must confess is beyond me. What she did, she did for the poor and the sick and to try to take that away from her is reprehensible.

 

[Trazor]

No there isn't.

An altruistic act is one which benefits only another ie. a completely selfless act.

However, an individual performing such an act will know they are acting in the interests of another, and gain from that act a feeling of pride or pleasure at their own selflessness.

Thus they also benefit from it.

Which means it's no longer altruism.

Totally correct, to mind mind true altruism doesn't exist.

i.e. Mother Teresa, was no doubt a saint to the poor in india (interestingly, though I think she was Bulgarian) but that said, what she did, she did for God, no doubt hoping for some recognition when she reached the pearly gates, not truly atruistic

I really think that you are doing a great disservice to those who are more concerned with the needs of others than with their own. Your assumptions on the reasons behind Mother Teresa's altruistic work in particular, are simply assumptions and nothing more. How you could, to prove a point, accuse her of having selfish aims, I must confess is beyond me. What she did, she did for the poor and the sick and to try to take that away from her is reprehensible.

Spot on bolo, only the selfish do not understand altruism, and it says an awful lot about those who do not believe in it.

 

[bernardgreen]

People who are truely altruistic have no say in the matter....they get a reward whether they like it or not.

 

[koalabear]

You are absolutely right - Mother Teresa was one of these people who are 'more concerned with the needs of others than with their own'. Nobody is criticizing her! Her life was a wonderful example of dedicating oneself to the service of God and the needy, and nobody is saying otherwise.

Nobody is accusing Mother Teresa of 'having selfish aims'!

The discussion is whether true altruism can exist.

This is one that has long puzzled philosophers, scientists and religions alike. Mother Teresa appeared to act in ways that held no benefit to her - yet if by so doing, she gained satisfaction in herself, a satisfaction that she was serving God and helping the people - that 'satisfaction' is of benefit to her. Therefore her life was not truly altruistic.

 

[Shutpa]

hoping for some recognition when she reached the pearly gates, not truly atruistic

Sorry Koalabear but the accusation that she had selfish aims has been made here.

 

[tim west]

I gain no pleasure out of paying my income tax which benefits others, will that do?

 

[Shutpa]

I gain no pleasure out of paying my income tax which benefits others

And neither did I when I did the same before I retired and took up part-time work. However, could I just say this. If you would be so kind as to put in a few extra hours a week, say about ten, the extra money you would be required to pay in income tax, could be used to increase my pension and help pay for my three weeks holiday in Florida next year. After all you wouldn't want me to take my family to a 3-star hotel, would you?

 

[2scoops0406]

hoping for some recognition when she reached the pearly gates, not truly atruistic

Sorry Koalabear but the accusation that she had selfish aims has been made here.

Mother Teresa, was no doubt a saint to the poor in india

Selectively quoting is a bad thing.

 

[Shutpa]

hoping for some recognition when she reached the pearly gates, not truly atruistic

Sorry Koalabear but the accusation that she had selfish aims has been made here.

Mother Teresa, was no doubt a saint to the poor in india

Selectively quoting is a bad thing.

If the quote stands alone and highlights a point that you are making eg "Mother Teresa was no doubt a saint" then there is nothing wrong with that. Nevertheless, you did follow that with "hoping for some recognition when she reached the pearly gates" - hardly an accusation to direct at someone you've just called a saint.

 

[JohnD]

If people do something good, and get a warm glow from doing it, I don't begrudge them the feelings of satisfaction.

I have far less respect or people who appear to enjoy being unpleasant.

generaly speaking, people do the things they like doing, for one reason or another. Unless they are forced, paid or otherwise incentivised to do something else.

 

[Shutpa]

If people do something good, and get a warm glow from doing it, I don't begrudge them the feelings of satisfaction.

I have far less respect or people who appear to enjoy being unpleasant.

generaly speaking, people do the things they like doing, for one reason or another. Unless they are forced, paid or otherwise incentivised to do something else.

Well said, JohnD!