Ah, that's a different way of looking at it. Guess so. I'm not too well versed in psychological disorders anyway.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Would you
- Thread starter paste
- Start date
Ah, that's a different way of looking at it. Guess so. I'm not too well versed in psychological disorders anyway.
No one has to deal with it, or agree with you. Altruistic acts happen all the time. Now, if you're saying that if one gets so much as a good feeling from helping others, it's not altruism, than your very narrow and jaded definition would be true. But you can narrow virtually any behavior down to the most stringent, technical requirements and make it sound untrue.
I have no degrees, much less papers I've submitted to the psychological community, but it's my opinion that sentience makes true altruistic decision-making impossible. Even if you throw yourself on a grenade to save another person, it's only because you want them to survive.
As for the OP, that's just a plain old fashioned hostage situation. If you're in a line of work that might put you in said bargaining situation, I say do like Robert De Niro's character in Heat and never establish a relationship you can't turn your back on in 30 seconds.
It's also a loaded question.
As you mentioned above, it probably depends on your definition. I'm looking at altruism as being selflessness without any reward. For instance, if you died to save your child, it would be for the reward of the preservation of your genes and therefore a sort of survival. If it was for a friend it could be for the reward of not living in their absence, or going to an Elysium, or you want to be a hero - or a combination of these or other reasons that require an evaluation of risk/reward. You might even jump on a grenade for a stranger out of the principle that it is simply the right thing to do - which might be better described as martyrdom rather than altruism - but I think that all acts of a sentient being are filtered through a risk/reward evaluation. Even if the reward is being a "good person" or is posthumous. Many people believe in an afterlife, reincarnation, karma, nirvana, etc.
I think true altruism can only be mindless. Like bees sacrificing their lives for the hive without sentient thought about why they're doing it.
Like I said, I'm no scholar or authority on the subject. Just my opinion.
This is why it's a loaded question. Suppose someone else with a son was given the same dilemma and your son was collateral damage in the equation. It's a question about Dunbar's Number, dehumanization, and war.
I think the word altruism implies a choice being made. Altruism is a 'good' deed and something can't be 'good' if you're acting on instinct or otherwise not choosing to do it. The bee in your example isn't choosing to do good, he's just being a bee and doing what bees do out of animal instinct. That's not altruism.
Unfortunately the details are beyond the scope of this post. But you do realize how accurate and real to life this is?
Can i ASK the most important person if they want that?
I think it mainly comes down to this. If the most important person in my life tells me i absolutely do not want ten anonymous people to die to save my life then i would respect their wish no matter how i feel about them. If they don't get their say. I don't know. I can't honestly answer this question without being faced with the situation. And i know i'll never be. I certainly wouldn't kill millions or even ten thousands to save the person i love the most. And keep in mind i'm a misanthrope and don't like 99% of people. But still.
If we're talking about MY life though, then yes. But to an extent. I will not kill millions to save my life either. I don't think. An anonymous dozen? Yeah, probably.
I think it mainly comes down to this. If the most important person in my life tells me i absolutely do not want ten anonymous people to die to save my life then i would respect their wish no matter how i feel about them. If they don't get their say. I don't know. I can't honestly answer this question without being faced with the situation. And i know i'll never be. I certainly wouldn't kill millions or even ten thousands to save the person i love the most. And keep in mind i'm a misanthrope and don't like 99% of people. But still.
If we're talking about MY life though, then yes. But to an extent. I will not kill millions to save my life either. I don't think. An anonymous dozen? Yeah, probably.
On a one-to-one basis, with totally anonymous people involved, I would let any person parish in stead of my children. Of course I would feel guilty later while hugging my children. Once you get above one to one it gets a bit murky for me. Could I let 5 people parish to save one of my children? Ten? 100? I just don't know. I would like to think not, but in the moment I would still be only human. I just can't say what I would do.
Hopkins
Commercial User
If I were in that completely made up situation that will never really happen in my lifetime, I don't know what I would do.
I suggest that you read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. It may not change your mind, but it will give you something interesting to think about, a few new insights. You'll find it interesting, I bet.
the Selfish in the title has actually nothing to do with selfishness. It was the book publisher that wanted a flashy title. So to clarify, I'm not insinuating that you need to do this because you seem selfish. Also, the book is about biology and doesn't deal with atheism at all, if that's not your taste.
Well, I sort of mixed biological altruism with my theory that everything we do is selfish or has an ulterior motive that doesn't seem selfish to the person being "altruistic" (taking one for the team, for example). I should have clarified that.
My point is that even if what we want to do is "good", it's still what we want to do, and is therefore selfish at heart. The goodness of something doesn't cancel out the self interest behind doing it.
