The concept of altruism dates back to the time of the French sociologists and philosopher, Auguste Comte. The word altruism comes from the Italian language and means serving others. Roughly, altruism appears as the opposite of the then reigning ideology of egoism. On the other hand, mutual aid dates back to the time of Peter Kropotkin. The Russian geographer and self-proclaimed anarchist gave up all his wealth and better lifestyle in order to advance his theory of mutual aid. The major concern was the liberation of the fellow Russians who languished in poverty.
This paper will examine the origin of the concepts of altruism and mutual aid. It will also examine the controversies or conflicting perspectives that surround the two concepts such as the power of self-interest in the life of a human being. Furthermore, it will highlight on the history of the poor people in the middle ages, the forms of aid that was available then, and the similar endeavors in the present day.
According to Altruists International (2014), the idea of altruism came from Auguste Comte. This new concept sent the scholars and great thinkers of the time back to the proper examination of major moral and religious ideologies. At this stage, the two major ideologies that were reigning were that of benevolence and self-interest. The concept of altruism gained ground in the 1850s, raising many philosophical and scientific questions. Altruism contains three major ideas. These are the intentions, actions, and the ideology itself. In this regard, altruism takes forms like psychological, behavioral, and ethical. Behavioral altruism refers to consequences that result from actions. These consequences are essentially, the benefits that others derive from the agent acting (A...
... middle of paper ...
...y altruistic-concerned with the welfare of others and not theirs-then any altruistic action would not begin in the first place (Oren, 2010). This is because none of the agents in the altruistic world would need any help from other altruistic agents. This argument is purely philosophical and has the necessary mathematical rigor required. However, the major argument that chief opponents of altruism put forward is the idea of self-responsibility. Under ordinary conditions, an individual has no obligation to help others. In this regard, people should only engage in actions that are personally rewarding. Moreover, being concerned with the welfare of others at the expense of one’s own amounts to self-neglect; this is true since true altruism dictates that agents have no personal interests. This implies that agents in altruistic world take no responsibility for themselves.
Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner provides incredibly valuable insight into the intertwining concepts of identity and personal happiness, as does A Complicated Kindness by Miriam Toews. Undeniably, a healthy cognisance of personal identity is crucial to mental tranquility and happiness. Insecurity, for example is unilaterally viewed as an unsettling character flaw precisely because of the inherent implication of untrue personal identity. Accurately understanding one’s true personal identity is the backbone of happiness, as seen in The Kite Runner and A Complicated Kindness. Furthermore, it can be said that personal flaws, strengths and collectivist mentalities surrounding both Amir and Nomi’s characters ultimately contribute to their respective happiness or lack thereof, at the end of both stories.
People perpetrate seemingly selfless acts almost daily. You see it all over the news; the man who saved that woman from a burning building, the mother who sacrificed herself to protect her children from the bomb blast. But how benevolent are these actions? Are these so-called “heroes” really sacrificing themselves to help others? Until recently, it was the common belief that altruism, or selfless and unconditional kindness, was limited primarily to the human race. However, within the last century, the works of several scientists, most prominently George Price, have provided substantial evidence concluding that altruism is nothing more than a survival technique, one that can be calculated with a simple equation.
Effective Altruism is a combination of philosophy and social movement that involved moral values to improving the global, for example, poverty, death of disease and starvation. The values of effective altruism consist open-mindedness, critical thinking, and global empathy. Which means, doing things that bring largest positive influence, applying evidence and aim to identify the effective ways, and valued all lives. In Singer’s speech, he said that "Effective Altruism is combined with head and heart. Define how necessary it is and doing in a right direction. Singers also gave examples of a two-year-old girl who has hit by two truck and preventable disease--Malaria." (TED, 2013) Like, “the ripple effect” (TED,
Ethical egoism is diametrically opposite to ethical altruism, which obliges a moral agent to assist the other first, even if he sacrifices his own interest. Further, researchers justify and rationalize the mental position of egoism versus altruism through an explanation that altruism is destructive for a society, suppressing and denying an individual value. Although the ‘modern’ age unsubtly supports swaggering egoistic behavior in the competitive arena such as international politics, commerce, and sport, in other ‘traditional’ areas of the prideful selfishness showing off, to considerable extent discourages visible disobedience from the prevalent moral codes. In some cases, the open pro-egoist position, as was, per example, the ‘contextual’ interpretation of selfishness by famous German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, can be described as a ‘grotesque anomaly’.
This problem claims that altruism is only intrinsically good, and it is only a means to an end. I disagree with this claim and I believe that altruism can be both intrinsically and extrinsically good. It is clear that altruism is intrinsically good as it can result in a better understanding of morals and beliefs for both the recipient of the help and the one that provided the assistance. Altruism can also be extrinsically good. Helping other people because they are suffering can produce results that are extrinsically good for both parties as well. For example, after you have assisted someone who is suffering the person who received the aid could potentially do something in the future that he or she would be unable to do without the previous assistance. This thing then could benefit the one who acted altruistically in the first place extrinsically. Baggini himself even said that altruism at least values the right thing, which is leading a full life. The same cannot be said for other common optimistic
Egoism is a teleological theory of ethics that sets the ultimate criterion of morality in some nonmoral value (i.e. happiness or welfare) that results from acts (Pojman 276). It is contrasted with altruism, which is the view that one's actions ought to further the interests or good of other people, ideally to the exclusion of one's own interests (Pojman 272). This essay will explain the relation between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. It will examine how someone who believes in psychological egoism explains the apparent instances of altruism. And it will discuss some arguments in favor of universal ethical egoism, and exam Pojman's critque of arguments for and against universal ethical egoism.
The issue of altruism is complicated by the lack of agreement about many aspects of it, including its very definition. The word altruism, which comes from the Italian altrui, was coined in 1851 by August Comte to refer to benevolence (2). Although not everyone agrees today on what precisely altruism entails, the most basic definition is seeking the welfare of others (1). This definition is often extended, however, to include the necessity of some personal sacrifice on the part of the altruist; Edward O. Wilson defined altruism as "self-destructive behavior performed for the benefit of others" (1), (3). There is also an idea of reciprocal altruism, which is self-sacrificing behavior with the expectation that the favor will be returned eventually (4). If this behavior is motivated by the desire for future reward, it does not really fit the generally accepted definitions of altruism.
According to the article, Altruism and helping behavior, it is common for people to help others. Altruism is defined as “the desire to help another person even if it doesn’t benefit the helper” (Altruism and Helping Behavior. Print.). Helping behavior is “any act that is intended to benefit another person”
There are many things that are important in this world. Some people value the material things in life, while others value the relationships. Altruism is the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others. Howard Roark in Ayn Rand’s “Fountainhead” praises selfishness and denounces altruism. He argues for selfishness and egoism and against the conventional morality of altruism. I believe that Howard Roark is correct when he denounces altruism.
There are many people around the world who are in need of altruistic people in their lives. Some long for help, other loathe it. Either way, since we have been given so much and others have so little, it is our job to help provide for those people. It is our job to make sure that we are not being selfish and taking more than we need instead of spreading the wealth throughout the impoverished world. The only way our world will ever step toward better lives for everyone is if we all stop being selfish and distribute the wealth and happiness we have been given.
One’s desire is egoistic if and only if it concerns the benefit of oneself and not anyone else. On the other hand ones desires are altruistic if and only if it concerns the benefit of at least someone other than oneself. The pros of altruism state that people will begin to take advantage of you, it is impossible to only make others happy, and you would be neglecting your own needs. The pros of egoism include establishing a greater sense personal identity in a community, promoting a sustainable household, it also promotes that all basic personal needs will always be met. The other half of this argument, the con sides of egoism, state that it will ruin relationships, it completely eliminates objectivity, you are neglecting the needs of others, you would be isolated and independent, and it requires that everyone practice its philosophy. The issue with that is that most people are not comfortable with the concept of always putting themselves
The thought of spring break brings up images of partying in warm weather, drunken one-night stands, and the raging hangovers that follow; yet for Rachel Garneau, a junior at Notre-Dame, it represented an pseudo-holiday opportunity for giving, and give she did. This twenty year old gave up a kidney for a complete stranger. There was an air of psychosis to her as she walked right into the University Of Chicago’s Bernard Mitchell Hospital, calm as ever; her demeanor quite indifferent, her nonchalance quite unnerving. Funny how we find this act of complete altruism ‘weird’; because it is weird, all that we know from evolution, Darwinism, basic human tendencies, and even the insightful field of behavioral economics contradicts what Rachel Garneau chose to do at 5:45 a.m. on a Tuesday: she gave till it hurt, and then some more.
Before a case can be made for the causes of altruism, altruism itself must first be defined. Most leading psychologists agree that the definition of altruism is “a motivational state with the ultimate goal of increasing another’s welfare.” (Batson, 1981). The only way for a person to be truly altruistic is if their intent is to help the community before themselves. However, the only thing humans can see is the actions themselves, and so, selfish intent may seem the same as altruistic intent. Alas, the only way that altruism can be judged is if the intent is obvious. Through that, we must conclude that only certain intents can be defined as altruistic, and as intent stemming from nature benefits the group while other intent benefits yourself, only actions caused by nature are truly altruistic.
Altruism, in basic terms, is the absence of selfishness. You may be thinking ‘wow, no one is selfish? That sounds like a perfect society.’ Unfortunately, it is the opposite. In an altruistic society, there is no concept of a “self-respecting, self-supporting man. Which means that altruism permits no view of man other than as sacrificial animals, its permits no concept of co-existence among men, and it permits no concept of justice.” (Peikoff). Almost sounds a bit like Hobbes’ ‘State of Nature,’ except rather than being a war of all against all, it’s is that everyone is a poor and worthless as the next guy. So what does this tell you about a society that lacks selfishness? It’s unfavorable. So selfishness is, in turn, a good thing. Without it, we end up finding ourselves having no self-value and eventually conclude that there is no true, underlying reason to even exist. Where the Golden Rule comes into play here is that we are taught the Golden Rule to instill in us the consideration and compassion of other individual’s feelings by performing selfless acts, but the Golden Rule is selfish, and that is a good thing. By having our self-interest at heart while performing a good deed, it shows that we have our own values (Sanford Rose Associates). Although, some people may have different internal values that misconstrue each person’s idea of selfishness, known as Objectivist ethics, but that is
According to dictionary.com, altruism is “the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the welfare of others” (Dictionary.com). Altruism comes in different forms. One example of altruism is community service; this type of altruism can be used for natural disasters and is typically unorganized. Another example of altruism is monks. Monks give up their belongings and give them to someone who really needs it. Although it seems like altruism exists in the human race, it is not. In human nature, altruism is non-existent because biologically a human being cannot have self interests and people have other motivations to do a selfless act., making it an extrinsic motivation rather than intrinsic. In Freud’s Civilization And Its