altruism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-07-2017, 07:30 AM
RE: altruism
(25-06-2017 09:13 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  So i made a comment on a post i made about The Good Book about how i don't trust altruism. I don't want to divert that thread but i think its important to address an objection made. This is an area where i seriously have to criticize atheist. So many atheist i have talked to don't read the origins of various ideas and ask "where did this idea come from and why did this person believe it.". Altruism is a Christian idea,and its a bad Christian idea. To define altruism simply its the belief that the only moral actions are those in which the actor gets no benefit. Not only is this unrealistic it is contrary to human psychology. Even if the only reason someone does something is for a sense of moral superiority.

I only help people for selfish reasons. If its someone i know and care about i help them because i want them to be happy. If it is someone i don't know i help them because one day i might need help. I do not trust altruism, or people who claim to act from selfless reasons.

The origin of altruism was an attempt to provide a secular ethic in the context of comte's belief in the fallen nature of man. So many times we atheist either don't question how theist beliefs shape even atheist scientists ideas.
Actually altruism is observable in nature friend.

peace

Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like popsthebuilder's post
05-07-2017, 07:32 AM
RE: altruism
(05-07-2017 07:20 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  
(05-07-2017 06:32 AM)Dom Wrote:  You are totally ignoring two basic, genetic things: empathy and auto responses.

People have different levels of empathy - they are genetically equipped with different levels of the ability to feel what other animals feel. As with all genetic attributes, evolution distributes this with zero on one extreme, and super strong ability on the other. People on the latter extreme actually feel pain when others do, and helping brings relief, pleasure and satisfaction.

For more people than we (or they) think, jumping into dangerous waters to save some baby is an auto response. They don't think, they leap. It's genetic.

All your rationalizing is futile when genetic predispositions are in charge. You can form any conclusion you like with reason, but in the end, your genetics are in charge.

If helping others in itself has no reward for you, you just don't have much empathy - if you did, not helping would be painful and helping would be rewarded.
I am going to disagree with nothing you said as I understand it.
My problem with what you said however is two fold.
1) Empathy is not altruism, nor does it cause an Q response.
Q is defined as an action which has either null or negative reward for the individual.
If i act out of empathy I act to alleviate my own pain. If I am successful I am rewarded by going from a state of in pain, to a state of pain relieved which has a opioid effect.
2) I don't think you mean by "auto response" what I would mean by that term. For me auto response is synonymous with subconscious response. This can be demonstrated using the example of a hitlarian level racist. Such an individual would not in fact jump into the river to save a drowning black baby, while they would do so for a white baby. I just looked for it and can't find it but I was hoping to find a news story I read several years ago. Here's the gist. A former white supremacist who was interviewed who talks about how he was at a restaurant and saw a black kid choking to death. He talks about the pleasure he felt while this was happening. Then he goes on to talk about how that makes him feel now, and how angry he is at himself and how ashamed he is. I posit that should something like that happen to him today he would more than likely try to save the kid.

Before his definition of my tribe(Us) and their tribe(them) has shifted. What has happened in this case is that the definition of tribe has widened.

I am in no way denying the power of empathy. I am saying that the concept of Q is as fraudulent as the concept of god. People act in accordance with their hierarchy of values.

For the majority of people, altruism is not a Q response at all.

The entire discussion here only concerns a small fraction of the population.

And yes, indoctrination does override genetic responses at times, if strong enough. Racism today is indoctrination. It is entirely possible to grow up including other races in the "tribe".

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
05-07-2017, 07:52 AM
RE: altruism
(04-07-2017 11:49 PM)BlkFnx Wrote:  Jesus is real. This is a different statement than Jesus actually exists or ever existed. Reality is subjective. The schizophrenic really does hear voices, those voices do not actually exist. Jesus, an invisible man who wants to torture me for eternity, took all of my control from me. Then a stranger who believed it was jesus's right to torture me if I didn't change my sinful choice told me how amazing and great my abuser was. Then she asked my abuser to take me back into his loving arms.

Why do you keep bringing Jesus up in the sense that he is a real person who has some actual power over you? I said Christians have a right to put you on their program when you go to Christians for help, and you have the right not to turn to the Christians for help in the first place. I'm not sure how I conveyed that a pretend person who died 2,000 years ago has the power or "right" to "torture" you.

Your answers are on the melodramatic side and you're flip flopping on your position to maximize the drama. First you're presented with the choice of being a prostitute or to have to go to a Christian shelter, and you say that it really wasn't much of a choice at all. Then you say that the Christians tortured you and that being a prostitute was safe and empowering. ...Then you brought up schizophrenia.

So before I reply further to your post, if you’re suffering from a legitimate mental health disorder such as schizophrenia (or any other mental health disorder), and you need me or other posters to ease up because this kind of talk is damaging, please know you're welcome to reveal that information. We're not going to demonize you or tease you. I don’t want to upset someone with a legitimate health disorder that is beyond their control.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
05-07-2017, 08:37 AM
RE: altruism
So now I face a dilemma. Do I let you keep the conversation sidetracked, or do I get back to the original point. I have decided I will attempt to offer a brief answer to your post before moving back to the actual point of this thread. Afterwards I am going to need to insist that we stay on topic or move to a new thread if you wish to have a conversation about my mental health.
(05-07-2017 07:52 AM)Aliza Wrote:  
(04-07-2017 11:49 PM)BlkFnx Wrote:  Jesus is real. This is a different statement than Jesus actually exists or ever existed. Reality is subjective. The schizophrenic really does hear voices, those voices do not actually exist. Jesus, an invisible man who wants to torture me for eternity, took all of my control from me. Then a stranger who believed it was jesus's right to torture me if I didn't change my sinful choice told me how amazing and great my abuser was. Then she asked my abuser to take me back into his loving arms.

Why do you keep bringing Jesus up in the sense that he is a real person who has some actual power over you? I said Christians have a right to put you on their program when you go to Christians for help, and you have the right not to turn to the Christians for help in the first place. I'm not sure how I conveyed that a pretend person who died 2,000 years ago has the power or "right" to "torture" you.

Your answers are on the melodramatic side and you're flip flopping on your position to maximize the drama. First you're presented with the choice of being a prostitute or to have to go to a Christian shelter, and you say that it really wasn't much of a choice at all. Then you say that the Christians tortured you and that being a prostitute was safe and empowering. ...Then you brought up schizophrenia.

So before I reply further to your post, if you’re suffering from a legitimate mental health disorder such as schizophrenia (or any other mental health disorder), and you need me or other posters to ease up because this kind of talk is damaging, please know you're welcome to reveal that information. We're not going to demonize you or tease you. I don’t want to upset someone with a legitimate health disorder that is beyond their control.

Real is a slippery term which I distinguish from Actual. A false memory is real in that the individual remembers (often vividly) an experience which never actually happened. There is a great deal of work out there on this phenomena which is best demonstrated by a great number of child abuse cases that were reported during the 70's 80's and 90's which actually never happened. In some cases the memory of abuse was physically impossible (The father or brother was in a completely different state during the time frame given). To the victim however the memory is very real and must be treated by the therapist as if it were actually occurred before the memory itself can be deconstructed .

I know there is no invisible man named Jesus. It however does not mean at the time that I was not very angry with the concept of Jesus. Just because Jesus is imaginary does not mean that the delusion does not have actual consequences for those of us who do not experience the delusion.
Then there are people who are tortured by the idea that they are going to hell by because they are gay.
If you wish we can discuss concept formation in relation to people actual or imaginary we may do so IN ANOTHER THREAD.



Returning to the original point of this thread and the original conversation.

Like the idea of god and the supernatural altruism is a null concept except in so far as it has real destructive consequences on individuals and society. It begins with the false premise that rational self interest is evil, then moves onto the even more destructive concept of "the greater good", before finishing with "You cannot be good if you benefit".

People claim that altruism exists without demonstrating any proof of the concept. They believe in it because they feel it is true. When someone asks for proof that it exists we are presented with an altruism of the gaps argument. "Here is this example see altruism.". These examples in EVERY SINGLE CASE boil down to 'want there to be altruism therefore I will read it into the example.'

Please give me an example of altruism which cannot be explained by something else that is just as or more than likely. Otherwise like Laplace when presenting his model of the universe we may say 'It works just as well with or without it.'. If you do so however understand that just because you believe in altruism does not mean there is any need for it to explain anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 10:56 AM
RE: altruism
(05-07-2017 12:46 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  ...
Q is defined by the taking of an action which does not benefit the actor in any way.
...

So it's a process?

Consider

(05-07-2017 01:22 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  ...
Q is an unselfish concern for the welfare of others.
...

Oh! It's a baseline?

Huh

(05-07-2017 01:22 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  ...
Q is a concept about why someone does something.
...

And now it's an abstract?

Unsure

I think you're better off leaving 'Q' out of this.

This forum has had a history with Q and it wasn't pretty.

Laugh out load

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like DLJ's post
05-07-2017, 12:37 PM
RE: altruism
(05-07-2017 08:37 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  So now I face a dilemma. Do I let you keep the conversation sidetracked, or do I get back to the original point. I have decided I will attempt to offer a brief answer to your post before moving back to the actual point of this thread. Afterwards I am going to need to insist that we stay on topic or move to a new thread if you wish to have a conversation about my mental health.

Just for the record, I’m using the definition that came up when I googled it. That includes selfless acts toward the welfare of others, but selfless doesn’t necessarily mean to one’s own peril. It could just mean that I’m doing something for another person’s well being that has a neutral affect one me, or has a very minor detrimental effect that doesn’t impact me very much. Maybe I lose some of my free time because I chose to spend it hammering in nails for Habitat for Humanity, or maybe I lose some cash which I felt I could afford to lose anyway.

I thought I’d actually been very clear on my position with altruism. Altruism is not a measurable thing because you can’t know for sure what people are thinking and what really motivates them. When you imagine scenarios of selfish behavior, all you’re doing in speculating. You don’t know. I’m not saying altruism exists, and I’m not saying it doesn’t exist. I’m saying you can’t know for sure. You’re projecting your own nasty, negative perspective onto others and disregarding their protests because you lack the empathy to view things from another’s position.

My relative once choked on a piece of food in a public place. Some guy snuck up behind him, grabbed him, performed the Heimlich maneuver on him and walked away. My relative never learned who it was or why he did it. He never even got to see the guy’s face or thank him. No one who witnessed the event noticed the hero slip away. We don’t go around bad-mouthing the person who saved his life or suggest that all people who perform the Heimlich maneuver are really selfishly motivated to save the lives of some people, but let other people die.

Whether altruism exists or doesn't exist, or whether this hero acted selfishly or altruistically, my relative didn't die. That's all I care about.

If you want to sit there on your high horse and assume that everyone who tries to help you has secret selfish motives, then you go right ahead. Your thoughts are your own and they have no impact on me, and I don’t think they’ll have any measurable impact on anyone else based on the responses I've seen in this thread.

All you’re doing here is yammering on and on about nothing of consequence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
05-07-2017, 12:39 PM
RE: altruism
(05-07-2017 10:56 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(05-07-2017 12:46 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  ...
Q is defined by the taking of an action which does not benefit the actor in any way.
...

So it's a process?

Consider

(05-07-2017 01:22 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  ...
Q is an unselfish concern for the welfare of others.
...

Oh! It's a baseline?

Huh

(05-07-2017 01:22 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  ...
Q is a concept about why someone does something.
...

And now it's an abstract?

Unsure

I think you're better off leaving 'Q' out of this.

This forum has had a history with Q and it wasn't pretty.

Laugh out load

No joke when i finished reading your response I actually said out loud "Holy shit you got it". You nailed exactly the problem I have when when people try to prove altruism. I honestly cannot understand why people feel the need to hold onto altruism with a death grip when things are explained without it just fine. I am dead serious about this. Atheists would never let Christians get away with the shit arguments that are used to defend god. And they are the exact same arguments when you get down to it. "It works just as well with or without it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 12:43 PM
RE: altruism
(05-07-2017 07:30 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(25-06-2017 09:13 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  So i made a comment on a post i made about The Good Book about how i don't trust altruism. I don't want to divert that thread but i think its important to address an objection made. This is an area where i seriously have to criticize atheist. So many atheist i have talked to don't read the origins of various ideas and ask "where did this idea come from and why did this person believe it.". Altruism is a Christian idea,and its a bad Christian idea. To define altruism simply its the belief that the only moral actions are those in which the actor gets no benefit. Not only is this unrealistic it is contrary to human psychology. Even if the only reason someone does something is for a sense of moral superiority.

I only help people for selfish reasons. If its someone i know and care about i help them because i want them to be happy. If it is someone i don't know i help them because one day i might need help. I do not trust altruism, or people who claim to act from selfless reasons.

The origin of altruism was an attempt to provide a secular ethic in the context of comte's belief in the fallen nature of man. So many times we atheist either don't question how theist beliefs shape even atheist scientists ideas.
Actually altruism is observable in nature friend.

peace

Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk

As I said before trying to prove altruism by observing animals is like trying to prove that circumcision prevents STD's by comparing statistics from the USA to African countries instead of European. There is no way to question an nonhuman species about it's hierarchy of values.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 12:53 PM
RE: altruism
Quote:For the majority of people, altruism is not a Q response at all.

The entire discussion here only concerns a small fraction of the population.

And yes, indoctrination does override genetic responses at times, if strong enough. Racism today is indoctrination. It is entirely possible to grow up including other races in the "tribe".
I think you meant to say auto response.
Race was the specific example given but it is not the only defining factor in an individuals concept of tribe. Just look at Democrat VS Republican, Church vs Church, and so on. Even in the atheist community we see this narrowing of definition of tribes.

Hierarchy of values does a much better job at explaining human action than does the meaningless concept of altruism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 01:17 PM
RE: altruism
(05-07-2017 07:30 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(25-06-2017 09:13 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  So i made a comment on a post i made about The Good Book about how i don't trust altruism. I don't want to divert that thread but i think its important to address an objection made. This is an area where i seriously have to criticize atheist. So many atheist i have talked to don't read the origins of various ideas and ask "where did this idea come from and why did this person believe it.". Altruism is a Christian idea,and its a bad Christian idea. To define altruism simply its the belief that the only moral actions are those in which the actor gets no benefit. Not only is this unrealistic it is contrary to human psychology. Even if the only reason someone does something is for a sense of moral superiority.

I only help people for selfish reasons. If its someone i know and care about i help them because i want them to be happy. If it is someone i don't know i help them because one day i might need help. I do not trust altruism, or people who claim to act from selfless reasons.

The origin of altruism was an attempt to provide a secular ethic in the context of comte's belief in the fallen nature of man. So many times we atheist either don't question how theist beliefs shape even atheist scientists ideas.
Actually altruism is observable in nature friend.

peace

Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk

It's been said. Often. And disregarded by the op.

Ironic, no?


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: