Altruism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Altruism (from Latin: alter: the other) is the deliberate pursuit of the interests or welfare of others or the public interest.

Contents

[edit] The notion of altruism

The concept has a long history in philosophical and ethical thought, and has more recently become a topic for psychologists (especially evolutionary psychology researchers), sociologists, evolutionary biologists, and ethologists. While ideas about altruism from one field can have an impact on the other fields, the different methods and focuses of these fields lead to different perspectives on altruism. Research on altruism was sparked in particular after the murder of Kitty Genovese in 1964,[1] who was stabbed for over half an hour in front of passive witnesses who refrained from helping her.

[edit] Viewpoints

[edit] Ethology

In the science of ethology (the study of animal behaviour), and more generally in the study of social evolution, altruism refers to behaviour by an individual that increases the fitness of another individual while decreasing the fitness of the actor.[2] Researchers on alleged altruist behaviours among animals have been ideologically opposed to the social Darwinist concept of the "survival of the fittest", under the name of "survival of the nicest"—the latter not being globally compatible, however, with Darwin's theory of evolution. Insistence on such cooperative behaviours between animals was first exposed by the Russian zoologist and anarchist Peter Kropotkin in his 1902 book, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution.

Recent developments in game theory (see ultimatum game) have provided some explanations for apparent altruism, as have traditional evolutionary analyses. Among the proposed mechanisms are:

The study of altruism was the initial impetus behind George R. Price's development of the Price equation which is a mathematical equation used to study genetic evolution. An interesting example of altruism is found in the cellular slime moulds, such as Dictyostelium mucoroides. These protists live as individual amoebae until starved, at which point they aggregate and form a multicellular fruiting body in which some cells sacrifice themselves to promote the survival of other cells in the fruiting body. Social behavior and altruism share many similarities to the interactions between the many parts (cells, genes) of an organism, but are distinguished by the ability of each individual to reproduce indefinitely without an absolute requirement for its neighbors.

Jorge Moll and Jordan Grafman, neuroscientists at the National Institutes of Health and LABS-D'Or Hospital Network (J.M.) provided the first evidence for the neural bases of altruistic giving in normal healthy volunteers, using functional magnetic resonance imaging. In their research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA in October, 2006,[5] they showed that both pure monetary rewards and charitable donations activated the mesolimbic reward pathway, a primitive part of the brain that usually lights up in response to food and sex. However, when volunteers generously placed their interests of others before their own by making charitable donations, another brain circuit was selectively activated: the subgenual cortex/septal region. These structures are intimately related to social attachment and bonding in other species. Altruism, the experiment suggested, was not a superior moral faculty that suppresses basic selfish urges but rather was basic to the brain, hard-wired and pleasurable.[6]


A new study by Samuel Bowles at the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico, US, is seen by some as breathing new life into the model of group selection for Altruism, known as "Survival of the nicest". Bowles conducted a genetic analysis of contemporary foraging groups, including Australian aboriginals, native Siberian Inuit populations and indigenous tribal groups in Africa. It was found that hunter-gatherer bands of up to 30 individuals were considerably more closely related than was previously thought. Under these conditions, thought to be similar to those of the middle and upper Paleolithic, altruism towards other group-members would improve the overall fitness of the group.

If an individual defended the group but was killed, any genes that the individual shared with the overall group would still be passed on. Early customs such as food sharing or monogamy could have levelled out the “cost” of altruistic behaviour, in the same way that income taxes redistribute income in society. He assembled genetic, climactic, archaeological, ethnographic and experimental data to examine the cost-benefit relationship of human cooperation in ancient populations. In his model, members of a group bearing genes for altruistic behaviour pay a "tax" by limiting their reproductive opportunities to benefit from sharing food and information, thereby increasing the average fitness of the group as well as their inter-relatedness. Bands of altruistic humans would then act together to gain resources from other groups at this challenging time in history.[7].

Altruist theories in evolutionary biology were contested by Amotz Zahavi, the inventor of the signal theory and its correlative, the handicap principle, based mainly on his observations of the Arabian Babbler, a bird commonly known for its surprising (alleged) altruistic behaviours.


[edit] Psychology

Psychological egoism can be accused of using circular logic. For instance, an egoist would not disagree with the following syllogism: "If a person has willingly performed an act, then he/she has manifested such intent in the form of that act. Fulfillment of one's desires is the primary requisite of satisfaction. Ergo, a person can only willingly perform acts that result in his/her personal enjoyment." This logic is sometimes viewed as circular or presumptuous. Specifically, egoism leans on the assumption that satisfaction is synonymous with self-satisfaction. Such a precept automatically sidesteps counterpoint, however, and remains unfalsifiable. Thus, until empirical evidence favors one view or the other, egoism must acquiesce to uncertainty.

Humans are not exclusively altruistic towards family members, previous co-operators or potential future allies, but can be altruistic towards people they don't know and will never meet. For example, some humans donate to international charities and volunteer their time to help society's less fortunate. It can however be argued that an individual would contribute to a charity to gain respect or stature within his/her own community.

Beginning with an understanding that rational human beings benefit from living in a benign universe, logically it follows that particular human beings may gain substantial emotional satisfaction from acts which they perceive to make the world a better place.

[edit] Religion

Most, if not all, of the world's religions promote altruism as a very important moral value. Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, and Sikhism ,etc, place particular emphasis on altruistic morality.

[edit] Christianity

Altruism was central to the teachings of Jesus found in the Gospel especially in the Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon on the Plain. From biblical to medieval Christian traditions, tensions between self-affirmation and other-regard were sometimes discussed under the heading of "disinterested love," as in the Pauline phrase "love seeks not its own interests." In his book Indoctrination and Self-deception, Roderick Hindery tries to shed light on these tensions by contrasting them with impostors of authentic self-affirmation and altruism, by analysis of other-regard within creative individuation of the self, and by contrasting love for the few with love for the many. If love, which confirms others in their freedom, shuns propagandas and masks, assurance of its presence is ultimately confirmed not by mere declarations from others, but by each person's experience and practice from within. As in practical arts, the presence and meaning of love become validated and grasped not by words and reflections alone, but in the doing.

Though it might seem obvious that altruism is central to the teachings of Jesus, one important and influential strand of Christianity would qualify this. St Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica, I:II Quaestion 26, Article 4 states that we should love ourselves more than our neighbour. His interpretation of the Pauline phrase is that we should seek the common good more than the private good but this is because the common good is a more desirable good for the individual. 'You should love your neighbour as yourself' from Leviticus 19 and Matthew 22 is interpreted by St Thomas as meaning that love for ourself is the exemplar of love for others. He does think though, that we should love God more than ourselves and our neighbour, taken as an entirety, more than our bodily life, since the ultimate purpose of love of our neighbour is to share in eternal beatitude, a more desirable thing than bodily well being. Comte was probably opposing this Thomistic doctrine, now part of mainstream Catholicism, in coining the word Altruism, as stated above.

Thomas Jay Oord has argued in several books that altruism is but one possible form of love. And altruistic action is not always loving action. Oord defines altruism as acting for the good of the other, and he agrees with feminists who note that sometimes love requires acting for one's own good when the demands of the other undermine overall well-being.

[edit] Sikhism

Altruism is essential to the Sikh religion. In the late 1600s, Guru Gobind Singh Ji (the tenth guru in Sikhism), was in war with the Moghul rulers to protect the people of different faiths, when a fellow Sikh, Bhai Kanhaiya, attended the troops of the enemy. He gave water to both friends and foes who were wounded on the battlefield. Some of the enemy began to fight again and some Sikh warriors were annoyed by Bhai Kanhaiya as he was helping their enemy. Sikh soldiers brought Bhai Kanhaiya before Guru Gobind Singh Ji, and complained of his action that they considered counterproductive to their struggle on the battlefield. "What were you doing, and why?" asked the Guru. "I was giving water to the wounded because I saw your face in all of them," replied Bhai Kanhaiya. The Guru responded, "Then you should also give them ointment to heal their wounds. You were practicing what you were coached in the house of the Guru."

It was under the tutelage of the Guru that Bhai Kanhaiya subsequently founded a volunteer corps for altruism. This volunteer corps still to date is engaged in doing good to others and trains new volunteering recruits for doing the same. [8]

[edit] Sufism

In Sufism there is the concept of I’thar which is the notion of ‘preferring others to oneself’. For Sufis it means devoting to the others in complete forgetfulness in the concerns of their lives. The importance lies in sacrifice for the sake of good for the believers of Islam; it is seen as the highest degree of nobility. [9] This is similar to the notion of chivalry but unlike the European concept there is a focus on attention to annulment of everything in this world towards Allah and therefore a careful attitude towards this world. [10] This concept was emphasized by Sufi mystics like Rabia al-Adawiyya who paid attention of difference in dedication to god and the dedication to people in this world.

[edit] Buddhism

In Buddhism, karma (Pāli kamma) is strictly distinguished from vipāka, meaning "fruit" or "result". Karma is categorized within the group or groups of cause (Pāli hetu) in the chain of cause and effect, where it comprises the elements of "volitional activities" (Pali sankhara) and "action" (Pali bhava). Any action is understood to create "seeds" in the mind that will sprout into the appropriate result (Pāli vipaka) when they meet with the right conditions. Most types of karmas, with good or bad results, will keep one within the wheel of samsāra; others will liberate one to nirvāna.

Buddhism relates karma directly to motives behind an action. Motivation usually makes the difference between "good" and "bad", but included in the motivation is also the aspect of ignorance; so a well-intended action from an ignorant mind can easily be "bad" in the sense that it creates unpleasant results for the "actor".

In Buddhism, karma is not the only cause of everything that happens. The commentarial tradition classifed causal mechanisms governing the universe as taught in the early texts in five categories, known as Niyama Dhammas:[11][12]

  • Kamma Niyama — Consequences of one's actions
  • Utu Niyama — Seasonal changes and climate
  • Biija Niyama — Laws of heredity
  • Citta Niyama — Will of mind
  • Dhamma Niyama — Nature's tendency to produce a perfect type

[edit] See also

[edit] References

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Vinciane Despret, Naissance d'une théorie éthologique - la danse du cratérope écaillé, Les Empêcheurs de penser en rond, 1996, p.38 (French)
  2. ^ Bell, Graham (2008), Selection : the mechanism of evolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 367–368, ISBN 0198569726 
  3. ^ Brown, S.L. & Brown, R.M. (2006). Selective investment theory: Recasting the functional significance of close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 1-29.
  4. ^ Herbert Gintis (September 2000). "Strong Reciprocity and Human Sociality". Journal of Theoretical Biology 206 (2): 169–179. doi:10.1006/jtbi.2000.2111. 
  5. ^ Human fronto–mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation, PNAS 2006:103(42);15623-15628)
  6. ^ "If It Feels Good to Be Good, It Might Be Only Natural". Washington Post. May 2007. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/27/AR2007052701056.html. 
  7. ^ Fisher, Richard (07 December 2006) "Why altruism paid off for our ancestors" (NewScientist.com news service) [1]
  8. ^ The great gurus of the Sikhs, pg, 253, New Delhi: Anmol Publications Pvt Ltd., 1997, ISBN 8174884793 
  9. ^ M (2004), Key concepts in the practice of Sufism : emerald hills of the heart, pg. 10-11, Rutherford, N.J.: Fountain, ISBN 1932099751 
  10. ^ Neusner, Jacob Eds (2005), Altruism in world religions, pg. 79-80, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown Univ. Press, ISBN 1589010655 
  11. ^ Caroline Augusta Foley Rhys Davids, Buddhism. Reprint by Read Books, 2007, [2].
  12. ^ Padmasiri De Silva, Environmental philosophy and ethics in Buddhism. Macmillan, 1998, page 41. [3].

[edit] Bibliography

Monk-Turner, E., Blake, V., Chniel, F., Forbes, S., Lensey, L., Madzuma, J.: Gender Issues, Helping Hands: A Study of Altruistic Behavior, Fall 2002, pp. 65-70

[edit] External links

Personal tools