• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Altruism

Shevek

Well-Known Member
V.I.P Member
There are a lot of gifts that come with obligations. The Japanese have several ways to say "thank you" which all denote degrees of resentment over the obligation felt. These relationships are important, as a community is much safer and stronger with co-operation, but is weakened by freeloaders. Real altruism might begin with parenting, although that is done to ensure survival of one's own genes.

However, the same pleasure centers that light up with the success of a child can also be turned on by a wide range of similar experiences. Raising an adopted, unrelated child might qualify, but there may be an expectation of support in old age. Raising a kitten will only yield affection, if that. However, there can also be great satisfaction in just giving away things one can't use any longer to where they will do the most good, or planting a tree one will never eat from.
 
I believe it was Dawkins who hypothesized that altruism is selected for, at least in herd or social animals, because the sacrifice of the altruistic individual results in a certain percentage of its genes surviving in the rest of the group. But I don't know if that was ever followed up on, been disproven, or verified.

I raised a foster daughter for six years. No familial genes. Not even the same race or nation. It was at great cost to me financially and health-wise and resulted in a great deal of emotional pain. What did I get out of it? It felt like the right thing to do.

There is something in me that feels better when I address the needs of others. I am not expecting anything back and even prefer to be anonymous if possible.
 
That's the bit every one forgets about. The rational reality versus the emotional reality. And humans are certainly not unique in this regard. I recently saw a news story about a cow that has "adopted" an abandoned foal and is now feeding it.
 
Just thought I should add - animal altruism only goes so far:

One of my aunts used to breed Long Necked Tortoises for a pet shop. She used to get a clucky old Bantam hen to sit on the eggs. It was a game where timing was crucial. The hen was very protective over the eggs, but once they hatched they looked very tasty. :)
 
That's the bit every one forgets about. The rational reality versus the emotional reality. And humans are certainly not unique in this regard. I recently saw a news story about a cow that has "adopted" an abandoned foal and is now feeding it.
The mammalian response to infants - help being inspired by big eyes and clumsy, weak motions - seems to be very old indeed. A Leopard killed her first Baboon, and then tried to adopt its infant. Cats adopt chicks, if they are introduced just after the cat gave birth. Romulus and Remus were suckled by a Wolf. Lions protected a girl who was being attacked. There are many similar examples. I'm sure that the first domestic animals were orphans adopted by girls, not adults rounded up by innovative cowboys.
 
When my dog Ruby was a puppy I also had a couple of baby chickens. They were playmates and they all ate out of the same bowl together.

As an adult dog Ruby was a very well trained and specialized hunter, a killer, but she always saw chooks as friends. She panicked one of my mates one day when she got in to his chook yard, but all she wanted to do was sniff their bums.

[Edit] The chooks seem to understand this, none of them were frightened of her.
 
Three weeks ago, I would have agreed that altruism existed. But now, after having thought about this very thing--whether or not it exists--I am not so sure. It may instead be a social ideal. In every case but one that I have thought over these past three weeks, I have been able to come up with some hidden benefit to the person or entity doing the altruistic act or to society in general beyond the immediate issuer. And that's Mother Theresa. That there was a benefit to society, yes, but I think she genuinely did what she did because she truly was selflessly concerned about others. So in her case, I think she acted out of a pure motive untainted by manipulative or exterior agendas.

But--I could be wrong, too.
I'm still thinking about it.
 
Three weeks ago, I would have agreed that altruism existed. But now, after having thought about this very thing--whether or not it exists--I am not so sure. It may instead be a social ideal. In every case but one that I have thought over these past three weeks, I have been able to come up with some hidden benefit to the person or entity doing the altruistic act or to society in general beyond the immediate issuer. And that's Mother Theresa. That there was a benefit to society, yes, but I think she genuinely did what she did because she truly was selflessly concerned about others. So in her case, I think she acted out of a pure motive untainted by manipulative or exterior agendas.

But--I could be wrong, too.
I'm still thinking about it.
Passing on possessions to the person most likely to use them is a way of benefiting my values, but not myself, except for a feeling of satisfaction similar to a parent's.
Mother Teresa's mission did comfort the dying, but what drove her was to maximize the numbers of souls she thought could be saved from Hell by giving Catholic last rites, even to people beyond the ability to consent.
 
Mother Teresa's mission did comfort the dying, but what drove her was to maximize the numbers of souls she thought could be saved from Hell by giving Catholic last rites, even to people beyond the ability to consent.
Granted, I don't know too much about her. A friend, my age and from India, once told me how he was inspired to do good for others without seeking any good in return for himself after she came and talked at his school. I was the same age when I learned about her, about how she fought for care for the orphaned and abandoned, and about how she spoke before heads of state to advocate mercy for the rights as human beings as having dignity. Certainly, my idealization of her is mythical at best.

But maybe that's what true altruism is--not merely the selfless serving of others but as an ideal, as an abstract concept lodged so far beyond our individual attainment that its truth lies in the purpose it gives us to serve our fellow man from a corporate context, rather than in the realities that inform our motivations or are hidden in the costs we each must weigh before giving 'freely' of our time or otherwise. From here we might ask, is it a meta-norm? I don't know.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom