Why do we show altruism? Social and evolutionary biologists, psychologists, economists and philosophers alike have made many attempts at providing an explanation for altruism. As a result, many opposing theories have developed over the years. In this essay, I will attempt to explain altruism as the presence of an altruistic gene which is selected for by natural selection in terms of kin selection. I will explore evidence supporting this theory, as well as evidence pointing to psychological explanations such as reciprocal altruism, social norms and primitive sympathy.
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, explaining altruism in terms of natural selection may seem contradictory. [1] After all, natural selection is loosely defined as “survival of the fittest”. It follows that, genetic variability in individuals’ results in a selection process allowing those better adapted to their natural environment to survive and reproduce.[3] The genes which allow these individuals to survive are thus passed on to their offspring. [3] If natural selection is based solely on individual survival and selfishness, altruistic genes should have been selected against, and the origin of this behaviour could not possibly be a result of evolution but, is instead a result of learning or social pressures. [2] However, according to the study of Hebb, 1972, altruism is in fact an emotional state that is a product of evolution rather than learning, as cited by Plutchik. [4] This statement is supported by recent studies proving that an altruistic gene is present in the genotype of modern day humans and the presence of AVPR1 has been...
... middle of paper ...
...lection of this gene in our ancestors has allowed small kin-related groups to flourish into a modern and ever growing altruistic society. However, one distinctive problem with altruism has arisen. Whichever way you look at it, altruism stems from selfishness. [11] The presence of altruistic genes in humans today resulted from the selfish notion of gene inheritance. After all, genes are selfish and a person is simply the gene’s method of survival. [12] Reciprocal altruism, primitive passive sympathy and altruistic behaviour through social norms are acts which largely benefit the individual and can hardly be seen as a selfless act. In conclusion, altruism should not be defined as an act carried out by an individual in order to benefit another individual rather, it should be defined as an act carried out by an individual, regardless of motive to benefit another. [13]
In Barry H. Corey’s book, Love Kindness, the underestimated, devalued virtue of kindness is explored. Kindness is a powerful, gentle strength that is often underestimated and devalued. Living a life of kindness is not for the meek or the prideful for this is a humbling, bold, and whimsical way of being. Love and kindness are difficult to separate because kindness is a result of love in its most authentic state. Love and kindness are the keys to moments of vulnerability. In that moment of authentic love and kindness barriers are demolished and people are reached in their brokenness.
...present (Gangestad 1989). The paradox of altruism is another notion undefined because it interferes with Charles Darwin’s “survival of the fittest”. Now there is a gene present contributing to the benefiting of the vast number of species and no longer a battle for personal fitness? Organism’s now reproduce to carry on the successful offspring by themselves and genetically similar organisms (Rushton 1980). This is the evolution of species’ genes and now kin related species will obtain the same genes? Rushton expands more on Dawkin’s “selfish gene”. With zero evidence, he concludes that non-related species with the same genetic makeup can consist of altruistic behavior rather than it just pertaining to kin. Bringing us back to the question, how can a specie just know another’s genetic makeup? And how can they have the same genetic makeup and belong to a different kin?
Thomas Hobbes in Chapter 13 of Leviathan, and David Hume in Section 3 of An Enquiry Concerning the Princples of Morals, give views of human nature. Hobbes’ view captures survivalism as significant in our nature but cannot account for altruism. We cover Hobbes’ theory with a theory of Varied Levels of Survivalism, explaining a larger body of behavior with the foundation Hobbes gives. Hume gives a scenario which does not directly prove fruitful, but he does capture selfless behavior.
The two competing theoretical frameworks that attempt to explain the development of morality are cognitive-behavioral and cognitive-developmental. The cognitive-behavioral approach is taken by Liebert, and the cognitive-developmental approach is taken by Kohlberg.
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...
It is true that on many levels humans act in a cooperative way to benefit all-- but does that warrant a claim that man is genetically altruistic? Perhaps the reasoning behind his actions would lead to another view. As Ridley examines man's dependency upon others in his species, it becomes apparent that man is not necessarily a savage beast out to do everyone in, but rather a lone creature trying to ensure his survival. In comparing man as the lone hunter to the cooperative being he is today it is evident that his species has thrived and survived with much greater ease in a cooperative society as opposed to a lone hunter. Though it can be easily argued that this cooperation between man, is at some level a sort of mutual altruism, it may better be understood as a selfish means of survival. The saying goes that "there is safety in numbers, " this could not be more true for man's plight. Because alone man stands little chance of perpetuating his genes, he flocks to the community where he has the better chance of survival, as do his genes.
Altruism regards the individual life as something one may be required to sacrifice for the sake of
Altruism is selfless acts like someone willingly sacrificing their life for their child’s. When people show acts of altruism it is usually because they feel empathy for the person. They have feelings that reflect on how that person is feeling in the situation. We sacrifice ourselves for strangers in need to help reduce our personal distress of seeing them in need. Another reason is experiencing the feelings of the person in need. If a person sees someone having car trouble they will want to help because they remember having car trouble with no one around to help. They are sacrificing their wellbeing by pulling over to help, they could be putting themselves in a bad situation if the person is a criminal.
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...
Humanity fantasizes the act of kindness through the hope of a ripple effect that will create a domino of kind acts. “The Grateful Foxes” actualizes this effect as a part of life. The man who rescues the fox because of his moral obligation is rewarded his son’s life (Freeman-Mitford). The lesson of the story is to pursue the obligation of human good—it explains that a kind act is the means for having kindness in one’s life. “However, good deeds can be engaged in for either altruistic or egoistic motivations” (Kulow 560) and this raises the argument whether pursuing this obligation is true. In a study done by Katina Kulow called “In Pursuit of Good Karma: When Charitable Appeals to Do Right Go wrong” the pursuit of good karma is brought into question. The studies did conclusively argue the link between the belief in karma and one acting for future rewards (Kulow 560). The choice to act to be rewarded is deemed as egotistical—the choice to act kind for the benefit of one’s self is a fault of one’s character. Contrasting, the thesis of the study is the reasoning behind the man’s kind act in “The Grateful
The behavior of altruism in an individual is when it brings more costs than benefits for the benefit of another individual. Altruism comes from the Latin word "Alter" which means "the others." This translation of alturism describes it relatively well. Another great definition of altruism can be found in a statement of Edward Osborne Wilson, an American biologist. According to Wilson, "Altruism is defined in biology, as in everyday life, as a self-destructive
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.
Everyone has these genes in their body which then transfers over to actual human behavior. Dawkins explains that selfish behavior is expected in human nature because of the genetics behind a human. Basically stating that selfishness is a survival instinct so we would be willing
For someone who believes in psychological egoism, i t is difficult to find an action that would be acknowledged as purely altruistic. In practice, altruism, is the performance of duties to others with no view to any sort of personal...
The norm of reciprocity can cause us to behave in both negative and positive ways towards our neighbours. Entirely altruistic behaviour is rare and egoistic motivations often underlie actions which cause the betterment of others lives. Just as a chimpanzee will groom another's body with the expectation of receiving the same service in return, so do we help others in the hope of being rewarded in some fashion, be it recognition, the avoidance of guilt or the long term well being of the group t...