Star Trek uses contrast to get its point across. One of the biggest points it makes is the idea of altruism and self-interest (Ciulla, Chapter 6). Khan is portrayed as leading with self-interest as his guide, while Spock leads with more of an altruism feel. Altruism is defined as sacrificing your interest/wellbeing for those of the group (Kanungo & Mendonca). He is a Vulcan, who uses logic to guide his life. Due to this fact he does not weigh self-interest as heavily as humans, which was one of the strongest criticisms of altruism. The good for the majority is what confirms his decisions. There are two examples of this in the movie. When Kirk was stuck underground trying to find Genesis, Spock exaggerated the amount of time that would be needed to repair the ship. This was shocking because it could be considered a lie; however, Spock decided that since Khan could hear the conversation, it was better to exaggerate so that the ship could survive. The largest altruism action he took was when he sacrificed himself so that the ship could gain enough power to escape. This is the ultimate sacrifice and is very selfless. Khan on the other hand made the decision to follow Kirk into the NOVA, knowing that their shields would be disabled. By doing this he put his need for revenge over …show more content…
Kirk was the prominent displayer of this trait. He had an aura about him that drew people to him. He had legitimate power due to his ranking and also had factual knowledge. He also demonstrated referent power, because people looked up to him. Saavik and Clark Terrell are both examples of people who admire him. Clark even went as far as killing himself in order to save Kirk. To sacrifice oneself for another definitely stems from admiration. Khan on the other hand is resented by his followers. This is shown when the only talking follower says “we can’t go in there, our shields won’t work” and Khan pushes him
these traits presented in their roles, regardless of being thought of as an evil character or not.
personality trait is often shared with many other leaders who decided to take their own path and
The idea that a person can be purely good and altruistic does not exist due to society’s acceptance and embrace of the selfishness and greed of human beings. People these days are some of the most selfish beings to ever exist but they are not ashamed of their actions because of how the world around them welcomes their self-centered nature with open arms. Selfishness comes is many ways, shapes, and forms. Many businesses need to utilize the greed of mankind in order to make money and prosper; “Greed-for lack of a better word-is good. Greed is right. Greed works” (Wall Street). Even politicians use their greed to run campaigns for themselves in order to win the hearts of Americans. As well as fulfill their ultimate selfish goal to be the man
If one wishes to be a psychological egoist, then one needs to explain why people do certain actions that appear to be genuine acts of altruism.
First of all, there is a term closely followed with self-interest as we mention, “collective interest” or “altruism”, which means that, “Looking out for other’s welfare.” (Hospers, 39) Analogously, it is totally opposite from the idea of self-interest. Common sense always recognizes that the collective is more important than the individual. A country, which is formed by plenty people, so is more significant than a person. Collective interest has bigger influence than self-interest to the society, as the founder of utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham stated, “Personal pleasure and pain are dependent on the general happiness and prosperity of the whole community.” (Fagothey, 63) and “The greatest happiness of the greatest number.” (Fagothey, 63) As if people only are allowed to serve the community rather individual. However, I strongly disagree with it and believe they forget a truth that the whole unity consists of many small parts.
People show acts of altruism when they see someone in need of help. In the movie “Casablanca”, Rick shows acts of altruism to people he cares about and strangers. People show altruism for numerous reasons to help form or keep a strong relationship.
Is based on perception and how people perceive a leader and how well the person is able to communicate and inspire others will greatly affect how successful they can become. For example, a principal in a school has to have a certain amount of charisma, being able to communicate to the staff, parents, and student to about the vision of school. Much like a politician, the principal has to exude confidence in their vision but also must open up to others so that can align themselves with their followers. The principal can reward their followers by mentoring, training, and sharing leadership roles so that their followers can grow and becomes administrators
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.
This paper shows that altruism is a very complex issue and much more information could be introduced, following this would allow a greater look at the complexity of other views such as the religious or the philosophical side. Garrett Hardin’s ‘lifeboat ethics’ is a perfect example and proof of this paper, showing that we would rather let others gets killed instead of trying to help a
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.
still selfish in nature; to look at an even broader term, his motives are nationalistic which is the
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).
Throughout history, there have been leaders who are considered as admirable due to positive influences over other individuals. For example, in my opinion, Abraham Lincoln was able to influence the masses of people because he chose to think and behave differently from other leaders before him. When a person is considered as a leader, there are several responsibilities and qualities that will attract others to follow after the teachings that are demonstrated. Leadership can be described as the process for “guiding individuals, groups, and entire organizations in establishing goals and sustaining action to support goals (Shockley-Zalabak, 2015, p. 220). Additionally, each leader will usually have a distinctive
...et, M, Dobbins, G, Rush, M & Russell, J 1995, ‘Expert power, referent power, and charisma: Toward the resolution of a theoretical debate’, Journal of Business and Psychology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.178-179
As a role model, the followers would be able to connect, trust and have confidence in the leader and would want to emulate them. The concept of idealized influence or charisma shows that leaders are also individuals who are “admired, respected and trusted” (Bass, Avolio, Jung & Bernson, 2003).