Altruism - True Altruism Does Not Exist Essay

Humans are prenatally motivated to help those around us due to its evolutionary benefits that our species has a better chance of survival if all cooperate. Humans can also be nurtured to exhibit altruistic behavior through good parenting. Although most of the population agrees that altruism benefits society, scientific research has shown that even those who believe they are altruistic are not when they are put in situations which calls for selfless behavior. One phenomena that refutes the claim that most of the population strives for selfless behavior is known as the bystander effect. The bystander effect is when a person feels less responsible for doing selfless acts when they are in an environment of a group of

Altruism, despite the fact that a human conduct, needs extraordinary expressions to convey what needs be on all levels of unselfishness, for example, love and regard, since benevolence is regularly mistaken for any benevolent conduct made by living animals, and we should not utilize this general term to depict specific practices and behaviours.

Altruism is a concept in which the individual sacrifices regard for themselves in the interest of another. The ethics of altruism state that a person should act in a matter where their self-sacrifice yields the greater well being on the whole. To put that statement in the form of a fundamental principle of rightness, an action is right if and only if (and because) the action brings a net-gain of well being to anyone except the individual performing the action. The altruistic mentality of an individual according to this moral theory means that any action that they undertake should be in the interest of others rather than themselves. The ethics of this concept also state that relationships of greater value to the individual carrying out an action should come second in priority to those they have with strangers since the close relationship has a much more meaningful connection to a person’s life. In these situations, the only morally correct way of acting is in the way that defeats the well being of the agent of an action for the sake of others.

Bartel (1976) defines prosocial behaviour as ‘behaviour that intentionally helps or benefits another person’. Batson (1987) defines altruism as ‘helping another person for no reward, and even at some cost to oneself.’ This definition of altruism seemingly depicts the behaviour as selfless, however there is a wealth of research which suggests that this is not the case.

Another example of how altruism can be viewed in today’s society can be seen in the works of Mother Teresa and her plethora of altruistic acts throughout the globe. Although her focus was in India where she persued her novitiate (training), her organization has opened over 500 centers around the world helping the dying and the destitute (Moore 2002, pg. x). She took in the “untouchables” of society and gave them care and made sure that they were comfortable. Mother Teresa is often used as the benchmark when determining whether a selfless act is truly altruistic.

A theory of mind allows for other forms of altruism, reciprocal altruism, in contrast to kin selection (Clegg, 2007) is when the benefit is conveyed on another whom is not a relative and with no guarantee of anything in return. It is a gamble, the altruist must have a theory of mind in order to possess a level of trust that the benefit will be reciprocated and so is therefore a more human trait. This has been studied and observed by evolutionary psychologists using The Prisoner’s Dilemma Game (Clegg, 2007 pg. 147), the most common method used for studying altruism. Similarly with indirect reciprocity, the altruist is not guaranteed a benefit but bases his gesture on the possibility of a gain not from the person who the altruistic act was bestowed upon but from another, such as the wider community, for example, to boost one’s reputation (Clegg, 2007). McAndrew and Farrelly et al used empirical evidence to suggest that one’s reputation has a direct correlation with how attractive they are perceived to be and so therefore could have an influence on reproductive success (as cited in Clegg, 2007). Nedelou and Michod discovered a genetic element for altruism (as cited in Clegg, 2007) and as it has been demonstrated to be universal, it is probable that altruism is an adaptive behaviour.

Altruism is when the actions of a person promote the best consequences for others, yet do not benefit the person who performed the act. Abruzzi and McGandy (2006) explain that Auguste Comte developed the term to support his ethical stance that humans are morally obliged to serve the interests of others,

Altruism refers to the concern for the welfare and well being of others without personal gains or

Altruism, in which one selflessly devotes to the welfare of another without expecting anything in return, often elicits an inexplicable and intangible surge of joy, in which one gains a sense of purpose. For example, I have observed the therapists at PRANA, whom altruistically devote up to an hour, when initially only allotted a half-hour time slot, programming individualized treatments for each patient. In their hour- long treatments, they create a non-fraternizing relationship with their patients that is fully functional on trust, empathy, and generosity. Devoting that extra time to each patient gives not only the

Darwin’s (1859) theory of natural selection hypothesised that individual’s with traits that increased their chance of survival would be more likely to reproduce. Such fitness enhancing genes would thus be passed to their offspring, increasing the trait’s frequency in a population. Altruism thus appears to be an oxymoron to Darwin’s (1859) theory. West et al. (2006) defined such social behaviour that reduces an actor’s fitness but increases the

This study is anchored by The Empathy-Altruism Theory of Daniel Batson in 1981. This theory posits that when empathy is triggered, people are motivated to help out of genuine concern for the welfare of others regardless of cost or benefits. The theory states that if one feels empathy towards one person who needs help, one is likely to help the latter without any selfish thought. Otherwise, one will only help if the rewards of helping the other outweigh the costs. There are various rewards in helping others. One includes relief from the distress of seeing another person in trouble. This only shows that segregating true altruism from selfish concerns can be very difficult. (Lacking)

Hugh (1898) further argues that people recognize that they are motivated, in most if not all cases by their need to advance their self-interest. However, when they reflect on this issue, they are mistaken by the urge to believe that the truth is the centrally of this. Actions that are meant to show concern for other people, such as helping the needy are self-satisfying to the actor, and they expect that they will their reputation in the society and obtain returned favors. A good example is that of political aspirant who might engage in a lot of philanthropic activities in his community to win the support of his constituents.

Whether we are here to help others is a question I've often asked myself, and a question I will not be able to answer while I am still here on earth. Perhaps before I even consider that question, however, I should wonder whether we even can be here to help others: is selflessness really possible? Or is "altruism" merely doing things for others in order to feel good about ourselves? If human altruism exists, how does our neural system deal with it?

First, it is important to understand what altruism is. Altruism is any act carried out by an individual in order to benefit another individual. [1, 2] At first glance,

Altruistic acts are often seen through the benevolent acts of family members express towards each other on a regular basis. Because of the significant amount of genes we share with our kin, the survival of a family is prioritized equally to the survival of the individual. Each member of the family will therefore behave altruistically towards each other, due to the evolutionary drive for survival. The reason that parents behave this altruistically towards their offspring is because “parents (adults) are in a maximally favorable position to dispense inexpensive aid to offspring (eggs) that maximally resembles the parents genetically” (Alexander, 462). Even through altruism is perhaps highest between family members, people also feel more empathetic towards others who possess similar traits, as a large number of genes are share. As altruism “involves a loss of individual fitness, [it] can evolve only by group selection” (Nunney, 228). Therefore, we can see that nature’s force of the survival of the group is a primary driving factor for the appearance of altruism.