Altruism

[Azure-Supernova]

I don't really believe in it.

I see no positive benefits to it. Some people mention that warm, fuzzy feeling you get inside. Last time I did something nice, all I felt was hunger. I donated all of the money in my wallet before I had time to spend it on lunch.

Now that was just silly =P Lunch first and then give em the change (if you get any). And I've had that warm feeling, but I didn't give money.

I try to.

I mean, I donate to charity, but sometimes it comes down to "I could donate... or I could get that new widescreen."

What? Mass Effect 2 in full HD is hard to pass up.

Well at the end of the day, if you work for your money you deserve to enjoy it. I feel that I can do nice things without giving money.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

I don't believe in giving out money to people really unless they are providing me with some service. I will gladly give money to some busker on the street. I will not however give money to a homeless man. I will buy the homeless man a sandwich if he wants.

But really times are tough and I am unemployed so why the heck should I start putting the weight of the world's problems on my shoulders? I do not believe in helping people because of guilt. I believe people should only help each other because they want to, or out of the goodness of their heart. Notice how when those people came door to door, their reason for getting you to donate was because you should feel guilty? I think that is a cheap and useless tactic.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

I don't believe in giving out money to people really unless they are providing me with some service. I will gladly give money to some busker on the street. I will not however give money to a homeless man. I will buy the homeless man a sandwich if he wants.

But really times are tough and I am unemployed so why the heck should I start putting the weight of the world's problems on my shoulders? I do not believe in helping people because of guilt. I believe people should only help each other because they want to, or out of the goodness of their heart. Notice how when those people came door to door, their reason for getting you to donate was because you should feel guilty? I think that is a cheap and useless tactic.

Indeed, I felt it working to ¬_¬ It's very shoddy of them.

 

[Outlaw Torn]

You have to be careful when talking about altruism, some people may say that they are being altruistic in their actions when actually they are doing something charitable, for instance, whilst also seeing some personal benefit.

To make a slightly crude example, imagine you see someone being mugged and there is a generic good looking woman nearby who also sees. Normally you might turn a blind eye but you figure you might look good in the woman's eyes if you help the person being mugged. If you don't get any trouser action then you can just say you were being a hero, if you do get to spread your baby gravy then you'll just say you still helped someone out and anything else was a bonus.

As for my own views on altruism/charity/baby gravy, I don't take anything so I don't expect to have to give anything in return. The money I earn is going to be used as I see fit, if I fancy a £30 hot dog one day instead of letting someone in Foreignland have some meagre rations for a month then that's just tough for them. If you have a problem with that then by all means sell all of your worldly possessions and give the money to charity, send all of your wages, inheritance, loose change or whatever to them. I know that noone is going to do that because all humans are naturally selfish, some people just choose to pretend that they aren't and the rest accept it and have a stonking great time.

Hot dog anyone?

 

[Treefingers]

While it's unfair to demand or expect you to be altruistic, it's also pretty heartless to not care.

Altruism is great, im not sure there is any situation where is isn't. But no, expecting it from you isnt right. But then, being forced to do good isn't really altruism anyway.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

The money I earn is going to be used as I see fit, if I fancy a £30 hot dog one day instead of letting someone in Foreignland have some meagre rations for a month then that's just tough for them. If you have a problem with that then by all means sell all of your worldly possessions and give the money to charity, send all of your wages, inheritance, loose change or whatever to them. I know that noone is going to do that because all humans are naturally selfish, some people just choose to pretend that they aren't and the rest accept it and have a stonking great time.

Hot dog anyone?

I don't think that all humans are naturally selfish. I just think that anyone who calls themselves an altruist is really fooling themselves.

Let's say you are a billionaire. You decide you don't need your mansion, 5 cars, jet, and billions of dollars. You donate it all to the less fortunate, live off of a retirement savings of a few million, get a small apartment and a bike.
You still feel bad, because in your neighbourhood there are run down houses with families who can barely afford food in them. You give away your nest egg, apartment and bike, rent a small room, get a job, and walk to work.
You feel really bad now because there is a homeless man on your street.
You give him your job and apartment.
You decide to go live on a mountaintop meditating for the rest of your life. It is glorious and you love this gorgeous mountaintop that is all your own. You feel bad that you are hogging it so you tell everyone about it, give them the clothes off your back and now truly have nothing.

Do you really die warm and happy because you truly gave?

Until you are the MOST UNFORTUNATE person on the planet, there will always be someone out there less fortunate than you. Always. So all this donating because you are more fortunate than someone else is really not a solution. People need to be taught how to fend for themselves and take care of themselves. Simply throwing money at a problem isn't going to fix it.

So no, I don't think human's are all inherently selfish. I think we are all inherently lazy and guilty, and pretending to be altruistic makes us feel better about ourselves.

 

[steevee]

To an extent. I put small change in charity boxes and the like. Once a year I help collect money for charity for a week.

But I do resent people who try to make you feel bad for not giving money. I give as much money and time as I deem I want. I had almost the same problem at school just the other day. The usual types were collecting for Haiti. The ones who always want to appear to be helpful and charitale. When asked I refused ad suddenly I was a social Pariah! I do more than them for charity, yet I'm supposed to just give money out willy nilly because there was an earthquake on the other side of the world?

I'm supposed to feel responsible for those people?

Not I sir, not I.

EDIT - Sorry, just realised how Off Tpic that rant went.

In summary, yes to an extent I practice Altruism, but I feel it should be something you choose to do, not something that should be expected of you.

 

[maninahat]

Spoiler: Ayn Rand disapproves of this thread.

OT: It's a very noble virtue, don't see how anyone could disagree with it in principle.

Then again this is the internet...

Whilst Rand opposed Altruism and espoused selfishness, her definitions of the terms somewhat differ from the commonly used. In her eyes, selfishness was synonymous with "integrity"; as in, those who are true to themselves and unwavering in their own beliefs. In the case of altruism, Rand was referring specifically to the kind of altruism in which one is obligated to help others in society, even if it requires self-sacrifice.

 

[maninahat]

While it's unfair to demand or expect you to be altruistic, it's also pretty heartless to not care.

Altruism is great, im not sure there is any situation where is isn't. But no, expecting it from you isnt right. But then, being forced to do good isn't really altruism anyway.

They were operating within the traditional understanding of the term "altruistic" - one who is morally obligated to help others, rather than someone who can do so whenever they feel like it.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

As for my own views on altruism/charity/baby gravy, I don't take anything so I don't expect to have to give anything in return. The money I earn is going to be used as I see fit, if I fancy a £30 hot dog one day instead of letting someone in Foreignland have some meagre rations for a month then that's just tough for them. If you have a problem with that then by all means sell all of your worldly possessions and give the money to charity, send all of your wages, inheritance, loose change or whatever to them. I know that noone is going to do that because all humans are naturally selfish, some people just choose to pretend that they aren't and the rest accept it and have a stonking great time.

Hot dog anyone?

I'll have a hot dog! And I agree with pretty much everything you said there. It's not wrong to want to enjoy yourself, even though there are people suffering in poverty daily.

People need to be taught how to fend for themselves and take care of themselves. Simply throwing money at a problem isn't going to fix it.

Isn't this the whole "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day" deal? So if that's the case, why bother with charity at all?

 

[BlindMessiah94]

People need to be taught how to fend for themselves and take care of themselves. Simply throwing money at a problem isn't going to fix it.

Isn't this the whole "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day" deal? So if that's the case, why bother with charity at all?

Yes, that is exactly my point. Why bother at all? I only think it is pointless to donate if you are doing it because you feel guilty, which is my argument. You will never be able to stop feeling guilty because there will always be someone for you to feel guilty about, no matter how much you "give". So people that donate to charity because "it makes them feel good" really should start asking themselves why they donate.
It's easy to give away cash, it's harder to actually take action and help someone.
I figure if I am going to help people I'm probably going to help people I know and care about before total strangers, no matter how unfortunate their lives are.
May be mean, but it's honest.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

People need to be taught how to fend for themselves and take care of themselves. Simply throwing money at a problem isn't going to fix it.

Isn't this the whole "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day" deal? So if that's the case, why bother with charity at all?

Yes, that is exactly my point. Why bother at all? I only think it is pointless to donate if you are doing it because you feel guilty, which is my argument. You will never be able to stop feeling guilty because there will always be someone for you to feel guilty about, no matter how much you "give". So people that donate to charity because "it makes them feel good" really should start asking themselves why they donate.
It's easy to give away cash, it's harder to actually take action and help someone.
I figure if I am going to help people I'm probably going to help people I know and care about before total strangers, no matter how unfortunate their lives are.
May be mean, but it's honest.

Well it's not mean in the long run. When you think about it, very few people probably give to charity purely because they want to make a difference. You've got people who want to make an image for themself, get into heaven or because they feel guilty. All of which are pretty selfish. Whereas if I see someone struggling to lift something into their car or if they drop their wallet, I'll help out. But at least then I know I've genuinely helped someone.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

People need to be taught how to fend for themselves and take care of themselves. Simply throwing money at a problem isn't going to fix it.

Isn't this the whole "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day" deal? So if that's the case, why bother with charity at all?

Yes, that is exactly my point. Why bother at all? I only think it is pointless to donate if you are doing it because you feel guilty, which is my argument. You will never be able to stop feeling guilty because there will always be someone for you to feel guilty about, no matter how much you "give". So people that donate to charity because "it makes them feel good" really should start asking themselves why they donate.
It's easy to give away cash, it's harder to actually take action and help someone.
I figure if I am going to help people I'm probably going to help people I know and care about before total strangers, no matter how unfortunate their lives are.
May be mean, but it's honest.

Well it's not mean in the long run. When you think about it, very few people probably give to charity purely because they want to make a difference. You've got people who want to make an image for themself, get into heaven or because they feel guilty. All of which are pretty selfish. Whereas if I see someone struggling to lift something into their car or if they drop their wallet, I'll help out. But at least then I know I've genuinely helped someone.

I completely agree. Random acts of kindness are awesome, and I always do them, because it actually took action. I don't do them out of guilt. As you said "at least then I know I've genuinely helped someone".
I don't view that as Altruism though. I view that as not being a complete d-bag.
Altruism by it's definition is putting other people's needs before your own. It is impossible to be completely altruistic by this definition, because at some point you do need to be "selfish" and put yourself first. No man or woman can exist solely for another person (and be mentally and emotionally healthy).

 

[NoNameMcgee]

To be honest, you were extremely rude.. I mean you could have at least explained to them your attitude on the subject.

Personally I think we should all try and chip in a little to help with disasters. Those people who complain about not knowing whats happening with your money; well that's a flawed argument. You just have to find a respectable charity to give to and they will use your money wisely, do a little research, and then if you're still worried you're paranoid.

It's good to help others, even though you may not see the direct impact of what your money has done you know it helped towards a bigger cause.

If you have very little money to give though, that's when I can understand it. Personally I didn't give any money towards the Haiti fund (well, I haven't YET at least) simply because I'm sadly unable to work right now and the only scraps of money I get are borrowed from my family. This should change soon though, just waiting for the bloody visa to go through.

 

[Therumancer]

As for these charities...I can't help but feel they are wasting their time and money by throwing it down a well rather than actually making the well work. After all, these countries are often shitholes even with aid, so how come the millions/billions being spend aren't even making a dent in the lack of living standards problems?

For example, it's hard to turn your back on people starving to death, but looking at some of the African nations and such that we help, we're never going to solve problems related to the climate and it's abillity to sustain a population. All we do by distributing food is maintain a population in misery for a longer time, and make them dependant on our aid. Ultimatly dealing with an endless cycle. As cruel as it is, stepping back and letting the population reduce to the abillity the land can sustain would probably result in more good over a period of centuries than maintaining the current situation.

This is what I'm talking about. The millions and billions raised on awareness days and comic relief, sports relief etc. Where does it all go? It seems that despite our efforts these places aren't getting any better and they never will.

Well, that's the problem with treating the symptoms of a serious problem, rather than the cause. If you raise a billion dollars, spend it on food and medicine, and take it down to Somolia or the hell hole of your choice, it all gets used up and eaten. But since the enviroment is still harsh and overpopulated beyond it's abillity to sustain people just get sick again and of course still need to eat. That's because they are living off the charity so to speak, not that it's nessicarly there fault given the conditions.

Groups like the Peace Corps. and such go in there and try and do more permanant projects, but there really isn't much you can accomplish in that enviroment. Even if you say help dig wells or get farms started, there are still more people than the land can support even being properly developed.

I pretty much feel that right now in the US we have our own Ghettos, Barrios, Homeless Problems, families without insurance, etc... to deal with, and especially given the economic problems where these issues are getting worse I'd much rather see charity dollars going towards our own domestic issues. Issues which have no easy solution here either, but at least it can be argued our problems are societal rather than not having the infrastructure to support the people. It's occured to me that if some of these massive charity vaccination drives took that money and tossed it at our own homeless problem (along with the money already going there) I think more could be accomplished.

I didn't come to the conclusion that we should let the third world die overnight. I mean it's not like we haven't tried, but really I don't see what can be done under the current circumstances because honestly places like Africa, which are covered with Famine, don't seem capable of supporting the human population that they have without constant outside aid, and honestly how long can we keep that going, especially when we develop our own problems?

 

[ModsDeleteThisAccountPlease]

I am altruistic by my very nature.
I cannot help but help others, even if at no reward to myself.
Of course, not much I can do about monetary support unless I have money...

Same here, except when I try to help, I end up hurting everyone around me.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

Well, that's the problem with treating the symptoms of a serious problem, rather than the cause. If you raise a billion dollars, spend it on food and medicine, and take it down to Somolia or the hell hole of your choice, it all gets used up and eaten. But since the enviroment is still harsh and overpopulated beyond it's abillity to sustain people just get sick again and of course still need to eat. That's because they are living off the charity so to speak, not that it's nessicarly there fault given the conditions.

Groups like the Peace Corps. and such go in there and try and do more permanant projects, but there really isn't much you can accomplish in that enviroment. Even if you say help dig wells or get farms started, there are still more people than the land can support even being properly developed.

I pretty much feel that right now in the US we have our own Ghettos, Barrios, Homeless Problems, families without insurance, etc... to deal with, and especially given the economic problems where these issues are getting worse I'd much rather see charity dollars going towards our own domestic issues. Issues which have no easy solution here either, but at least it can be argued our problems are societal rather than not having the infrastructure to support the people. It's occured to me that if some of these massive charity vaccination drives took that money and tossed it at our own homeless problem (along with the money already going there) I think more could be accomplished.

I didn't come to the conclusion that we should let the third world die overnight. I mean it's not like we haven't tried, but really I don't see what can be done under the current circumstances because honestly places like Africa, which are covered with Famine, don't seem capable of supporting the human population that they have without constant outside aid, and honestly how long can we keep that going, especially when we develop our own problems?

Well as harsh as it sounds, I'd probably have to say that it wouldn't be a bad thing in the long run if the 3rd world did die out. It's a horrible thought, the loss of all those lives, but at the end of the day the 3rd world is a hinderance. I'm could not stand here and say that yes, we should let it get on by itself, but at the same time I'm not going to say that we should be pouring billions into it's survival.

The billions donated in charity is not making a difference, on top of that they're heaped in debt, on top of that their environment is harsh for humans to live in. It may just be an eventuality, that we will have to stop supporting them at some point. It's a drain on funds.

 

[Anticitizen_Two]

I'm an anarchist communist. So yes, I do.

 

[Kenni-chan]

mine is limited to my Boyfriend tbh

 

[Arkhangelsk]

My belief: Altruism is fake. Everything you do ever is based on egoism. But that doesn't stop you from helping others to fill your ego. You can help them if you want to, I'd do it if I had money to spend, but I have a life too, and I have my own shit to take care of.