The ideologies of western society emphasize the notion that selfishness is part of human nature. Also, that humans act according to what will benefit themselves and satisfy their own personal needs. However, this way of thinking has detrimental consequences. People, from a young age, are indoctrinated to believe that greed leads to self-preservation. This results in a hostile society where individuals compete with others for resources and wealth. Western society idolizes those who pursue individual success and take responsibility for their personal growth. However, this self-interested behaviour can cause humans to disregard the needs of others in their community. Some intellectuals argue that one cannot be both independent and socially interdependent,
Evolutionary models often focus on the grueling reality of natural selection and competition for resources. However, the truth of the matter is that humans would not have survived and continued to evolve without the collective efforts of a group. In 1957, Ayn Rand published a novel called Atlas Shrugged. In it, she theorizes that “every man–is an end in himself, he exists for his own sake, and the achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose.” She even states that “altruistic morality” is a disease. However, altruism has been proven to be a crucial part of human nature. This is not only limited to our evolutionary past as recent studies show that, even from a young age, we tend to display altruistic behaviour when we see others in need of help. The local and global response to the aftermath of a natural disaster is an example of this. Resources are shared and some people willingly risk their lives to aid distressed civilians. I think this is because humans are social creatures. We have an innate desire to be closer to others since we thrive the most when we have social support. During periods of isolation, humans are often overcome with stress and depression. Therefore, since we depend on our community at length, it does not make sense for selfishness to be one’s “highest moral purpose.” It is counterintuitive to seek our own happiness if it means
It allows us to acknowledge when someone is suffering and to react appropriately. However, I do not believe that one must always sacrifice their interests for the benefit of others. “Society in its unified and structural character is the fact of the case; the non-social individual is an abstraction arrived at by imagining what man would be if all his human qualities were taken away. Society, as a real whole, is the normal order, and the mass as an aggregate of isolated units is the fiction (Dewey).” I do not agree with this aspect of collectivism because I find it to be extreme. I have stressed the importance of caring about the people in one’s community. However, this does not mean an individual should have no sovereignty over their life and cannot make decisions for themselves. I strongly believe that people should live their lives as they see best fit. This holds true if they are not harming others in the process. I believe that John Dewey’s statement is incorrect because an individual is not a “fictional” entity until they become part of a group. Each person has their own body and mind so they should be treated as individuals and not just as a collective. Humans can come together in groups for mutual benefit. Although, this does not make that group the basis of reality with no concern for each person. This might seem to contradict my previous statements about our altruistic nature.
Larger groups hold a selfish and egoistical nature and do not care about others. “Societies, he argues, effectively gather up only individuals’ selfish impulses, not their capacities for unselfish consideration toward others.” (Imsong,1999, “Reinhold”, para. 9)
Why do you think the author chose the title he/she did? Analyze its deeper meaning. If it is an obvious title, rename it something more symbolic and explain your rationale.
Anthem, by Ayn Rand, is a very unique novel. It encircles individualism and makes the reader think of how people can conform to society and do as they are told without knowing the consequences and results of their decisions. Also, it teaches the importance of self expression and the freedom that comes along with being your own person and having the power to choose what path to take in life. Figurative language is used often in this book and in a variety of quotes that have great importance to the theme, plot, and conflict of the novel.
Children are taught the value in sharing, in ensuring that everyone is extended the same opportunities and the same kindness. Ayn Rand, however, had a different perspective. Her philosophy, called objectivism, favors morality that is based upon one’s own desires. Clearly, Rand by no means encouraged the citizens of every city to run amok in the streets, doing whatever they pleased, but she did believe that any man is responsible for himself and himself alone. Altruism is defined by a duty to others, and by the value in sacrificing oneself for the greater common good. Because this concept allows all of society an equal fighting chance, it is widely supported and well loved. Altruism is the go-to template for standup moral character: selfishness must never be practiced, think only of others, build your life around the lives around you, and so on. Objectivism runs in stark contrast to this, encouraging individuals to define their goals and adjust their behavior accordingly. Objectivism’s primary claim is that selfishness is, indeed, a positive thing, and that it brings about considerable success in
You and I do not exist; government deems it so. We are one, a single body functioning for the collective good of society. Ayn Rand’s Anthem speaks to this collectivist doctrine while highlighting the implicit contradictions that impede its successful implementation. Collectivism is any philosophic, political, religious, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human. Collectivism is a basic cultural element that exists as the reverse of individualism in human nature (in the same way high context culture exists as the reverse of
Is human nature inherently selfless or selfish? Although a seemingly simple concept, the aforementioned question has long been a profoundly controversial topic. While many claim that humans are intrinsically compassionate and inclined to help those in need, others argue that people instinctively prioritize their own individual security over other people’s welfares. Nathaniel Hawthorne’s literary works, “Young Goodman Brown” and The Scarlett Letter, as well as F. Scott Fitzgerald’s renowned novel, The Great Gatsby, all reference the idea that people impulsively pursue perfection, as determined by their community’s values. While different communities establish different standards for perfection, society as whole romanticizes the idea of perfection and subsequently people strive to create the illusion of a perfect life. How an individual represents the values idealized by a given community determines his/her reputation in that community. Although people may appear to wholesomely follow the values idolized by their community, in reality, human nature is inherently flawed, making it impossible for people to achieve perfection.
According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, altruism is defined as an “unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others”. In simpler terms, altruism is unconditional kindness. Altruistic behavior has been a controversial and obscure subject among biologists, including Charles Darwin, who was one of the first to try and explain this phenomenon. “To explain the evolution of altruism, Charles Darwin suggested that natural selection could act on groups as well as individuals--an idea known as group selection”(Schwartz). Group selection, which was based off of Darwin’s theory of natural selection, was the theory that an individual organism would sacrifice itself (seemingly selflessly) for the good of the entire population, hoping that its actions would save the group from annihilation and therefore allow for the continuation of the group’s gene flow into its descendants. Darwin explained that groups with members “ready to give aid to each other and sacrifice themselves for the com...
By definition, altruism is "the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the welfare of others". Through vigorous analysis, however, I have established it to be a complex ideology whose followers can be divided into three categories: slaves, abusers, and advocates. The slave abides by the ideals of 'pure' altruism. In other words, he does not act according to personal need or desire; humanity is all that matters. This is altruism in its purest form and is the branch of altruism which envelopes Catherine and allows her to feel a sense of purpose. Yet, much more common is the abuser of altruism. He is the altruist who ascertains and seizes any opportunity for personal gain by abusing the ostensibly philanthropic ideology. As ironic as this seems, it is common practice for one to proffer with the intention of receiving something in return. Peter Keating demonstrates how such an abuser manipulates altruism into a golden ladder by which he may reach success. Reigning over even the most conniving abuser is the omnipot...
Morality evolved to solve this problem of cooperation. The essence of morality is altruism, however there is a tendency for people to prefer group affiliations rather than individual interests or the interests of other groups (23). Morality helps avoid the Tragedy of the Commons, but not the Tragedy of Commonsense Morality (26). The Tragedy of Commonsense Morality is the separation between Us vs. Them outlined in the Parable of the New Pastures (15). In order to thrive with Commonsense Morality, humans developed a metamorality that allows conflicting moralities to live together
Individualism and collectivism are conflicting beliefs with the nature of humans, society, and the relationships between them, however, these ideologies are not diametrically opposing since both are essential towards balancing beliefs from becoming extremes. The first source represents the idea of collectivism and suggests that the society must focus on moving their viewpoint from ‘me’ into ‘we’ in the interest of survival and progression. This perspective presents the idea that the individual’s advantage belongs not only to the person, but to the group or society of which he or she is a part of, and that the individual’s values and goals are for the group’s “greater good.” Likewise, Karl Marx’s principle of communism emphasizes in the elimination
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’.
Psychological egoism, a descriptive claim about human nature, states that humans by nature are motivated only by self-interest. To act in one's self-interest is to act mainly for one's own good and loving what is one's own (i.e. ego, body, family, house, belongings in general). It means to give one's own interests higher priority then others'. "It (psychological egoism) claims that we cannot do other than act from self-interest motivation, so that altruism-the theory that we can and should sometimes act in favor of others' interests-is simply invalid because it's impossible" (Pojman 85). According to psychological egoists, any act no matter how altruistic it might seem, is actually motivated by some selfish desire of the agent (i.e., desire for reward, avoidance of guilt, personal happiness).
Capitalism, according to John Galt, is "mutual trade to mutual advantage," (Rand Atlas Shrugged 989) or as Adam Smith put it: "[trade] by mutual consent and to mutual advantage." In true capitalism, the economy is strictly separated from the state, just as there is a separation between church and state in the USA. This basic tenet of capitalism describes the only economic system that can be morally justifiable. Communism, fascism, socialism, dictatorships and "regulated capitalism" are all systems that breach upon an individual's basic rights, while capitalism respects and recognizes a man's right to control the product of his mind. In her philosophical treatise Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand uses fictional characters and events to dramatize the only economy that is consistent with man's rights and virtues.
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.
Individuality and conformity both play a major role in society. No matter what it may be individuals will need to choose appropriately between conforming and acting individualistically about their situation. Individuality allows individuals to freely express themselves while conformity offers safety under the protection of other conformers. Both of these aspects are beneficial to many individuals and is a key to maintaining societal order; however, it is disastrous to have too much of either side of the spectrum. Therefore, there should be a balance between individuality and conformity because having too much of either side morally and physically harms components of society, such that it pressures and forces individuals to do tasks against their will, and causes individuals to think selfishly and worry solely about themselves.