Altruism

[Saint Guinefort]

I am a firm believer that all people follow the Hedonistic Calculus of Bentham. Not that everyone wants to live like Caligula, but rather everyone seeks to minimize their pain and maximize their happiness.

To that end I am of the opinion that altruism doesn't exist per se.

If someone does something for another person that is purely altruistic they would have to be doing it because they WANTED to do it and therefore they felt it was something that would increase their happiness

An example: a soldier throws himself on a grenade. He does this out of love for his compatriots and he wants to see them survive. Which means he is acting according to the Hedonistic Calculus in that he will be happy if they survive.

The only way an action can be truly altruistic would be if the person doing it did NOT WANT TO DO IT and sees no value to the action that might make them happy in some way or decrease their discomfort.

If the person doing the altruistic thing in any way gains something from it (as simply as "I want my compatriots to thrive as it will make me happy to know that") it eliminates it's altruistic intention.

Basically you should throw yourself on the grenade if you hate your compatriots and want them to continue to exist unhappily.

 

[Althea]

Which is why Rand didn't believe in altruism.

That said, I'm quite sure a soldier does NOT want to get blown up.

That might be one of the truly selfless acts one might perform.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

That said, I'm quite sure a soldier does NOT want to get blown up.

It's not a matter of want to get blown up so much as "want to save his friends".

That might be one of the truly selfless acts one might perform.

ONLY if they didn't really want to save their friends. Otherwise it is something they want which will, presumably, make them happy (ie saving their friends is the goal) which wouldn't be altruistic.

 

[IBDaMann]

I am a firm believer that all people follow the Hedonistic Calculus of Bentham. Not that everyone wants to live like Caligula, but rather everyone seeks to minimize their pain and maximize their happiness.

I totally disagree with your logic. I agree that you have the idea of the Hedonistic Calculus of Bentham correct, but then you go entirely out of your way to warp, twist, fold, stretch, spindle and mutilate the definition of altruism to render it devoid of all altruism, transferring all altruism into the definition of the Hedonistic Calculus, such that the Calculus includes all altruism. Then you make the following statement:

To that end I am of the opinion that altruism doesn't exist per se.

Well, of course, by your totally butchered definition, you're right ... but not if you leave words alone.

Let's look at your example of the soldier who throws himself on a grenade. Yes, he would prefer to minimize his pain and suffering and avoid death, but his altruism takes over and he dives on the grenade. You can't say that people want to maximize their own happiness and simultaneously want to endure maximum suffering and death. In logic, that is a contradiction. I disagree that such a soldier would somehow wait to dive on the grenade until he had carefully considered which option would give him the most happiness. Altruism is an instinctive reaction/feeling to do what is right and is not the result of any rational calculus, and every day, people behave in altruistic manners, instinctively, without performing any happiness calculations.

"Excuse me, sir, you dropped a $10 bill over there."
"Crap, stop the car, there's a small animal in the middle of the road up ahead."

We all witness altruism every day.

Oh, by the way, wanting happiness for someone else over one's own happiness is straight out altruism, as is doing the right thing when it results in lesser benefit than doing the wrong thing. If altruism brings happiness, it's still altruism/philanthropy/kindness/ethical behavior.

 

[Lightbringer]

I am a firm believer that all people follow the Hedonistic Calculus of Bentham. Not that everyone wants to live like Caligula, but rather everyone seeks to minimize their pain and maximize their happiness.

To that end I am of the opinion that altruism doesn't exist per se.

If someone does something for another person that is purely altruistic they would have to be doing it because they WANTED to do it and therefore they felt it was something that would increase their happiness

An example: a soldier throws himself on a grenade. He does this out of love for his compatriots and he wants to see them survive. Which means he is acting according to the Hedonistic Calculus in that he will be happy if they survive.

The only way an action can be truly altruistic would be if the person doing it did NOT WANT TO DO IT and sees no value to the action that might make them happy in some way or decrease their discomfort.

If the person doing the altruistic thing in any way gains something from it (as simply as "I want my compatriots to thrive as it will make me happy to know that") it eliminates it's altruistic intention.

Basically you should throw yourself on the grenade if you hate your compatriots and want them to continue to exist unhappily.

Some of us wouldn't mind it.

 

[Yakuda]

I am a firm believer that all people follow the Hedonistic Calculus of Bentham. Not that everyone wants to live like Caligula, but rather everyone seeks to minimize their pain and maximize their happiness.

To that end I am of the opinion that altruism doesn't exist per se.

If someone does something for another person that is purely altruistic they would have to be doing it because they WANTED to do it and therefore they felt it was something that would increase their happiness

An example: a soldier throws himself on a grenade. He does this out of love for his compatriots and he wants to see them survive. Which means he is acting according to the Hedonistic Calculus in that he will be happy if they survive.

The only way an action can be truly altruistic would be if the person doing it did NOT WANT TO DO IT and sees no value to the action that might make them happy in some way or decrease their discomfort.

If the person doing the altruistic thing in any way gains something from it (as simply as "I want my compatriots to thrive as it will make me happy to know that") it eliminates it's altruistic intention.

Basically you should throw yourself on the grenade if you hate your compatriots and want them to continue to exist unhappily.

Order me if I'm wrong but it seems you're claiming happiness negates altruism.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Order me if I'm wrong but it seems you're claiming happiness negates altruism.

No, more subtley than that: if one wants to do something it is because they are attempting to reduce their pain or increase their happiness. If one wishes to sacrifice for someone else they feel good about making the sacrifice, they want to make the sacrifice, ergo it is not a wholly self-less act. It is, indeed, something that either increases their happiness or decreases their unhappiness.

 

[Yakuda]

No, more subtley than that: if one wants to do something it is because they are attempting to reduce their pain or increase their happiness. If one wishes to sacrifice for someone else they feel good about making the sacrifice, they want to make the sacrifice, ergo it is not a wholly self-less act. It is, indeed, something that either increases their happiness or decreases their unhappiness.

The vast majority of decisions are pain averse any resulting happiness is coincidental. People often make the self destructive decisions over and over again.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

I am a firm believer that all people follow the Hedonistic Calculus of Bentham. Not that everyone wants to live like Caligula, but rather everyone seeks to minimize their pain and maximize their happiness.

To that end I am of the opinion that altruism doesn't exist per se.

If someone does something for another person that is purely altruistic they would have to be doing it because they WANTED to do it and therefore they felt it was something that would increase their happiness

An example: a soldier throws himself on a grenade. He does this out of love for his compatriots and he wants to see them survive. Which means he is acting according to the Hedonistic Calculus in that he will be happy if they survive.

The only way an action can be truly altruistic would be if the person doing it did NOT WANT TO DO IT and sees no value to the action that might make them happy in some way or decrease their discomfort.

If the person doing the altruistic thing in any way gains something from it (as simply as "I want my compatriots to thrive as it will make me happy to know that") it eliminates it's altruistic intention.

Basically you should throw yourself on the grenade if you hate your compatriots and want them to continue to exist unhappily.

I made this exact thread about two months ago and you are correct, altruism does not and cannot exist.

Every action a person takes is because it’s what the individuals wants to do.

 

[Lightbringer]

I made this exact thread about two months ago and you are correct, altruism does not and cannot exist.

Every action a person takes is because it’s what the individuals wants to do.

I disagree. I think most people say and do things because they are worried about what other people will think... not because they want to do them.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

I disagree. I think most people say and do things because they are worried about what other people will think... not because they want to do them.

Exactly, they are picking the choice they want the most. In this case it is more important to them what people think than to do something they don’t want to do.

They are making a choice based on selfishness

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Exactly, they are picking the choice they want the most. In this case it is more important to them what people think than to do something they don’t want to do.

They are making a choice based on selfishness

Even if they just want to decrease the pain of conflict with other people's expectation it is still fufilling the hedonistic calculus.

 

[Into Тhe Night]

I made this exact thread about two months ago and you are correct, altruism does not and cannot exist.

Every action a person takes is because it’s what the individuals wants to do.

Some of us decide based on coin flips.

 

[IBDaMann]

I made this exact thread about two months ago and you are correct, altruism does not and cannot exist.

If this was your position two months ago, then you were wrong two months ago.

Every action a person takes is because it’s what the individuals wants to do.

Silly. You simply hijacked the word "altruism" to mean "what one doesn't want to do" and then concluded that altruism cannot exist because all people do what they want to do.

Altruism is a gut reaction, a reflex, an emotion, an instantaneous response. It is not calculated.

Your argument, and your attempted hijacking, is dismissed.

 

[IBDaMann]

Even if they just want to decrease the pain of conflict with other people's expectation it is still fufilling the hedonistic calculus.

Nope, anyone doing the right thing for selfless reasons is being altruistic. If the Hedonistic Calculus needs to hijack the word "altruism" in order to work, then the Hedonistic Calculus needs to be discarded and/or fixed.

Until it is fixed, it is discarded. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

 

[evince]

I am a firm believer that all people follow the Hedonistic Calculus of Bentham. Not that everyone wants to live like Caligula, but rather everyone seeks to minimize their pain and maximize their happiness.

To that end I am of the opinion that altruism doesn't exist per se.

If someone does something for another person that is purely altruistic they would have to be doing it because they WANTED to do it and therefore they felt it was something that would increase their happiness

An example: a soldier throws himself on a grenade. He does this out of love for his compatriots and he wants to see them survive. Which means he is acting according to the Hedonistic Calculus in that he will be happy if they survive.

The only way an action can be truly altruistic would be if the person doing it did NOT WANT TO DO IT and sees no value to the action that might make them happy in some way or decrease their discomfort.

If the person doing the altruistic thing in any way gains something from it (as simply as "I want my compatriots to thrive as it will make me happy to know that") it eliminates it's altruistic intention.

Basically you should throw yourself on the grenade if you hate your compatriots and want them to continue to exist unhappily.

Explain giving blood

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Explain giving blood

The person who gives blood wishes to good in the world and help other people. This makes them feel good to do good. Hence it is not purely altruistic.

If the person hated giving blood and had no desire whatsoever to help another person at all, in fact didn't even want to help someone, it would be purely altruistic.

 

[evince]

Maybe you should look the word up

It doesn’t mean what you claim it means

 

[evince]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/altruism


altruism
noun
al·​tru·​ism ˈal-trü-ˌi-zəm
Synonyms of altruism
1
: unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others
charitable acts motivated purely by altruism
2
: behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species

 

[Concart]

Therefore there is no free will. A pedophile cannot help himself anymore than the guy who rushed into the burning building or the guy who gave a billion dollars anonymously.

Society however cannot function in that manner.