Does Altruism Exist

[Tinyflame]

I think brat altruism exists, but there are times it's easy to lose faith in the human race. But it's there (I think).

 

[mamachick]

I apologize for going on further about this, I think writing about it is therapeutic for me as it is helping me to recall a shift in my thinking following this.

I have been a co-dependent in my lifetime. Went to groups and read and practice a lot back in late 80"s .I have 4 older sisters that though our mother loved me more as I was the baby. Therefore, I was guilted into taking on the greater responsibility in family matters, giving in to them constantly. If you did not do what they "wanted" you were considered "selfish". Nobody wants to be called selfish or treated that way. So more often than not, I was busier than a beaver caring for my own family, working, taking care of mom, working and going to school, taking on sisters problems, and then at the end of the day getting badgered by sisters because I left the hospital and missed seeing moms doctor because I went to class or some other criticism.

If Im the scapegoat in my family, it must be serving a purpose. It keeps me affiliated regardless of how painful it is. We all want approval from our family, and on rare occassion, I even got a little. So as hard as it was to admit-sometimes I did things to shut them up or to maintain my status of belonging. Im sure it fed their power to get me to do things. It was an unspoken exchange-yet clearly existed. Even getting something negative in return is still a benefit. I found that my idealist beliefs fed into being a victim. Doing for others and feeling like you are not getting treated well is victimization. If you are being a victim, those closest to you will be affected, so in a sense, doing what is best for yourself and that brings the best feelings to you may seem like the selfish way, but in reality, if it makes you happy, you return it to those closest to you and the world in general. We all need to feel filled up with good in order to give it back. For me, it was chosing a positive loop of exchange over negative. In some ways, its contrary to what we have been taught socially and through religion. So even with this realization, it did not prevent me from doing the good things for others that I did before, it prevented me from being taken advantage of.

When I say that this is therapeutic for me, I had a head injury in 2006 that brought my life to a halt. It is like I know stuff but forget how I know until a topic comes up that sets a light bulb off. Then if I have the opportunity to think about it or discuss it thoroughly, it takes me back to a more mentally healthy time.

 

[goingonhope]

In this part of my life I am not interested in controversay and debates as I have too great of responsibilities to manage and while in poor health.

Just my opinion, but I think the title would more accurately fit if it read: Altruism Does Not Exist And I Will Tell You Why.

Damn' if I had only known

 

[mamachick]

goingonhope-the title you propose made me laugh, and maybe it should have read that. Im sorry that you are in a place where you dont have the time, health, energy to look at different views. I have been there myself and just avoided those conversations.

Im sorry that sharing my beliefs about human behavior and its limitations have upset you. It was not my intent. I only wondered how many others have given this serious thought and if and how their conclusion brought about any peace and comfort.

 

[bethinhfx]

What's wrong with doing something for others because it benefits you? Isn't that the ultimate form of taking responsibility for yourself? I have done a lot of things for other people and resented the hell out of it only to feel embittered towards people who weren't as....ahhhh...caring?

I take care of my life because it benefits me. I am polite, responsible, caring, and take care of my side of the street because it benefits me. I am also a christian and pray for willingness to be compassionate and caring but there is compassion and then there is "idiot compassion", which benefits noone.

I don't think there is anything wrong with doing something for someone because it benefits you ( not in a manipulative/ dishonest sense) but in a win/ win sense. I don't think doing something that doesn't benefit you in some way is realistic over the long term and I think giving/caring/generosity benefit both the receiver and the giver. I worked with people for several years who had disabilities and went way beyond what was expected of me and at the time I thought it was my heart ( maybe it was) but what I benefitted from in terms of self-respect and self-esteem was priceless and for my benefit. Kind of like the free market theory...I don't think we should be so afraid of looking at things like that. Peace!

 

[Tinyflame]

Dear brat, don't apologize for the thread, it's good.

I am sorry that so many of us have experienced the other side of the coin, the 'aternative title'. :(

This may not help at all, but it reminds me of something.

In University I ended up in a Sociology (hated it, lol) course, but we read a book on people called the "Ik" (that I remember, lol). Anyway, they were wonderful, kind generous people who 'cared' for and about one another. That is, until their food supply disappeared. Then they became self-serving, angry, hurtful, even violent to one another. They had no word for 'want' (a luxury they didn't have), but about eleven words for 'need'.

The researchers, then, in their 'wisdom' (sic), would give each person 2 cookies a day. One guy (only ONE) would often give one or both away, often to children. Everyone made fun of him, including the children there that he gave them to. Some called him 'mental', no one could understand 'why'. But according to the researchers he seemed the only one not angry, not stealing from others, and at peace. (Actually, they described him as happy). He was silent about it, and didn't respond to the others' (the Ik's) criticisms, or ridicule. Just 'smiled' and continued to do it.

I too, have been co-dependent, I've been altruistic and I've been self-centered. I have done things out of 'duty', or loyalty, but also out of choice.

To me, altruism 'can' exist, because I feel like I've been the recipient.

As far as my own thoughts on it go (solely as regards myself), if it were just a matter of making me 'feel good' (which it often- but not always) does, it would solve ptsd (and SI). But it doesn't.

Perhaps because I know others have not realized my battles, I try to not presume I know theirs'. So if I can 'help' rather than 'hinder', maybe that's a better thing to leave behind in my life, even if I have not left much else, or the actions are very small.
But I don't mean it in terms of (a sense of my own) 'worth', nor is it any motivator to me when people say "there's a 'reward' ", or 'karma'.

More importantly, one thing I do think however, is the only thing ptsd hasn't taken from me is the option to choose what I 'like' (whether that's hot peppers or being so-called altruistic, lol). I can have an 'opinion'. And if I'm lucky I can do what I like, believe what I want, share what I want (at least some times)
.
I suspect if one day ptsd even takes everything (SI), at least until then I can 'choose' (hopefully) to not get entirely bitter- and to keep sharing some cookies. :)

 

[Meadowsweet]

Brat17 I think for therapeutic self-analysis, what you discovered from looking further into altruism is very beneficial.

With regards to religion and the value judgement of good people, I think the use of the concept as doctrine is misleading and manipulative.

I think this is what the wiki definition draws on, and I would agree. If that is altruism, then its a load of rubbish that doesn't actually exist. And you've done well to see through that definition.

But conceptual meanings are fluid, because they were born within the mind in the first place. So they are constantly evolving and changing and are often different depending upon the individuals understanding of the word. Different cultures, and sects within those cultures (including family units) might reach a concensus of opinion about what the word means. But because its meaning isn't fixed, it can be altered as we experience the ideas connected to the concept for ourselves, and find them to be lacking.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines altruism as 1) selfless concern for the well being of others; 2) (zoology) behaviour of an animal that benefits another at its own expense. This definition leaves the meaning much more open for interpretation.

For me, looking at how I think about words is a way of understanding how I think. And its really helpful to discuss meaning, because it does help to consider concepts from other angles.

 

[Tinyflame]

I must say I get lost in the words sometimes, just don't have the grasp. :(

If I can't equate it to a 'feeling' or an experience, or something I 'get', I'm lost. :(

 

[Barberian]

Sorry, I couldn't read past the first few posts. I believe altruism is a transient nature. I don't believe anyone can be completely altruistic all the time without some type of mental deficiency (that is not a judment against anyone who has tried to be kind, please don't read into this). That being said, some can be more altruisic than others. Look to the great altruistic people of recent history (use your judgment. Mother Theresa comes to mind). I have known extremely kind people who would give me the shirt off their backs if I needed it, and often in life I would do the same for others. I had what I believed to be common sense limits, I would not jepordize my families well being.

Unfortunatly, in my opinion, the more someone has, the less likely they are to be altruistic, except in the rediculusly rich like Bill Gates and such who give hundreds of millions to good(?, perspective) causes. Western culture is also less likely to be altruisic in my experiences.

 

[Tinyflame]

I think it can be easier to want to give if you know what it's like to be in need.

 

[Ted Moen]

One of my favorite songs is "Questions" by the Moody Blues which is all about this question. If we were to define "pure altruism" in the manner suggested, then there could be no such thing because social interaction consists of sets of reciprocating interactions. Pure altruism in the context of social interactions is a null set. However, altruism, like other concepts applied to social interactions, represents a range along a continuum of behavior, and in this sense is very real. People commit altruistic behaviors (more altruistic as opposed to less altrustic) all the time when presented with the choice exactly because it returns positive feelings about one's self.

Ted

 

[bethinhfx]

@ Ted: Kind of like " game theory". I think altruism does exist but I also don't think its wrong to conceptualize giving as being something that can benefit everyone. Peace! Beth :)