Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-18-2013, 10:15 PM
 
Location: USA
1,589 posts, read 2,127,384 times
Reputation: 1678

Advertisements

Just some thoughts about it that I wanted to post:

Where would the world be without people genuinely wanting to help each other? It's a good thing to help.

However, there are limits to the pain that different people could bear.
Some people can bear lots of pain. Some people panic at the slightest sign of pain.

So, when you help someone, and you have to suffer in order to help them, the question then is: how much of this pain are you willing to bear?

BUT, sometimes altruistic people don't experience pain when they do good things. For example, some people may have lots of money and may experience pleasure from giving it to others.
Some people may like cleaning and may experience good feelings from cleaning someone's house in order to help them.
Some people may like children and may experience double pleasure from babysitting someone's children: the fact that they helped out may make them feel good, plus they did not have to suffer when they did it, but actually enjoyed babysitting.

So, which being altruistic were you referring to? The people who suffer because of what they have to give? Or the people who receive pleasure from their giving?

I am sure there are both kinds.

I would love to see the world a happy place. But I also don't like to suffer. So, I would find the middle ground, compromises, to make them feel good and not to make me feel too much pain in the process.

Because, altruistic or not, people ultimately seek to please themselves. For example, if giving a gift to someone makes you feel good, then this feeling of pleasure supersedes the feeling of pain if you had to eat less in order to afford this gift. And ultimately, this person did the action which brought him the most pleasure (in this case, giving).

So, in this case, the pleasure was bigger than the pain. So was this person still considered altruistic? I think yes. But I don't think that most people realize that altruism probably in most cases brings pleasure to those people, not pain.

But why?

It's because they were programmed that way. And that's all it is. When they give, the reward centers in their brain light up (there was a study done on this, I read in “Discovery” magazine).
But there are other people, who were built differently inside, and the pleasure center does not light up in them when they give. So, for these people, what should be the motivating factor to give? Why should they?
Obviously, it makes sense for the first kind to give because it brings them pleasure. But why should the others do it? What is their reward? Humans ultimately respond to things which bring some sort of reward. It’s what triggers humans to do something. I suppose, not feeling guilty about something, is also a sort of a reward. So some can do stuff to avoid feelings of guilt. Or maybe this is more of a punishment system. But in any case, there has to be a motivator. So, for some it’s a reward that makes them do something. For others it’s the punishment or rather avoidance of it that makes them do something good. (God will punish you unless you…visit the sick… for example.)

Some say: but people shouldn't seek rewards. Well, it's easy to say. However, the good feeling you feel after doing something good IS that reward you're saying you don't care to receive.

But honestly, if there was no reward, if you did not feel good about doing something for another, why would you want to do it?

Well, there are other reasons: like duty, like feeling guilty if you don't do it, like God would punish you if you don't do it.

But I think that most people are happier to be altruistic when it brings them pleasure instead of pain. They just don't consider it pleasure (when they feel good about giving).

But different people have pleasure from different things. For example, my ex mother in law experiences pleasure only when she gives money to us so that we could buy something we don't usually buy. It's like she gets high on that feeling, that we now get to buy something we couldn't before. But just to give money for food, that’s no fun, not exciting, so she doesn’t do it.

But my ex father in law receives pleasure just from knowing that we are taken care of. So he is the one who likes to help out with regular things, like food.

So, from some perspective, he is better than her. But is that so? I guess both of them receive pleasure of their own kind. Both of them in effect seek this pleasure. And both of them are helpful to people, but just in different ways.


What about someone who is willing to suffer for you? Well, there is a person I know who says that it makes him feel BETTER inside if he knows that his girl is happy than if he is happy. So in this program inside of his mind, her happiness stimulates his reward center more than his own happiness. So, since we are creatures who seek happiness, all these people are trying to do things which bring them happiness or stimulate reward centers in their brain.

And it just so happens that many people who do good things do so because that brings them pleasure.

Not because they are somehow better than others.

But then again, from some perspective, they are better. For example, if you have two programs and one of them is helpful (user friendly) and the other one is not, you would say that the helpful one is better. Why? Because it brings you benefits, it makes your life easier.

In the same way, the people whose brain centers are programmed to light up when they do good things for others are beneficial to others. And so of course others would prefer them and like them better. Even though both kinds of people were made a certain way and didn’t really do anything, except just act out their programming and seek pleasure (or avoid more pain, because sometimes losing someone is greater pain than living, and so these people are willing to die for others because the thought of dying brings them LESS pain than the thought of seeing their loved one die. But again, they were seeking less pain. But it was beneficial to the other person. And therefore considered “better” in the grand scheme of things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2013, 11:28 PM
 
Location: Somewhere
8,070 posts, read 6,932,869 times
Reputation: 5654
I think one of your arguments is that altruism is seen as a selfless act and most humans admire selfless acts of kindness so they consider those people better than others. However you believe altruistic people are doing those acts for self serving purposes, to reward themselves or avoid negative emotions like guilt, not because they are selfless.

It seems to me you are equating "better" with selfless in this sentence:
"Not because they are somehow better than others"

But "better" can mean a lot of things and it's quite subjective I think it would be easier if we define what being a "better person" means.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 10:48 AM
 
Location: Whittier
3,004 posts, read 6,250,423 times
Reputation: 3081
I believe in order to be truly altruistic it has to hurt the ego. If you derive pleasure from it then the act may be good, but it isn't altruism, it's just helping people.

Being selfless is the key word. And this (in the absolute) is very, very hard to reach or even obtain.

The irony of acting selfless is very strong.

However we can and should help others, because it's just the right thing to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 01:12 PM
 
Location: USA
1,589 posts, read 2,127,384 times
Reputation: 1678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sugah Ray View Post

But "better" can mean a lot of things and it's quite subjective I think it would be easier if we define what being a "better person" means.
To me, better means more beneficial. I think that society thinks the same way, unofficially so to speak.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 01:16 PM
 
Location: USA
1,589 posts, read 2,127,384 times
Reputation: 1678
Quote:
Originally Posted by harhar View Post
I believe in order to be truly altruistic it has to hurt the ego. If you derive pleasure from it then the act may be good, but it isn't altruism, it's just helping people.

Being selfless is the key word. And this (in the absolute) is very, very hard to reach or even obtain.

The irony of acting selfless is very strong.

However we can and should help others, because it's just the right thing to do.
And why should anyone want to only give and not care about self satisfaction?
I think the system of only giving, pure selflessness can't work. It's like this person is assigning himself a fate to be always unhappy (if he has any feelings or desires at all). So that's why it's good that a reward center lights up when a person gives, that way it can work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 07:17 PM
 
7,581 posts, read 4,125,518 times
Reputation: 6935
I do agree with your example about your ex-MIL and FIL. They give in a way that fits their idea of being helpful and you don't want to judge who is better based on this gift.

I think the problem is really with the receiver. You can take the non-judgmental approach and treat all forms of altruism equally but you can't help but notice that some are more meaningful that others. For example, your FIL's gift is more meaningful than your MIL's gift because it is something that you really need right at this moment.

Do you believe you may have a more meaningful relationship with your FIL because of this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 09:13 PM
 
Location: USA
1,589 posts, read 2,127,384 times
Reputation: 1678
Quote:
Originally Posted by elyn02 View Post
I do agree with your example about your ex-MIL and FIL. They give in a way that fits their idea of being helpful and you don't want to judge who is better based on this gift.

I think the problem is really with the receiver. You can take the non-judgmental approach and treat all forms of altruism equally but you can't help but notice that some are more meaningful that others. For example, your FIL's gift is more meaningful than your MIL's gift because it is something that you really need right at this moment.

Do you believe you may have a more meaningful relationship with your FIL because of this?

What I was saying, I did not mean in a judgmental form (as in: let's see who really is better), but it was about information about human nature (as in: this is the way things work...just so that we could understand)

Since we are humans, we do have negative reactions sometimes when it comes to our well being. So, because of emotional reactions, I may think: well, she doesn't care about us, she just wants to give when it pleases her... and that thought gives a negative feeling about her giving (although something is better than nothing)
But he is perceived in a more favorable way: wow, this person really cares and is willing to help us, we are so grateful...

Even though they just act out their programming. It's not like they really have a choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top