Altruism or selflessness is the principle
or practice of concern for the welfare of
others. It is a traditional virtue in many
cultures and a core aspect of various religious
traditions and secular worldviews, though
the concept of "others" toward whom concern
should be directed can vary among cultures
and religions. Altruism or selflessness is
the opposite of selfishness.
Altruism can be distinguished from feelings
of loyalty. Pure altruism consists of sacrificing
something for someone other than the self
with no expectation of any compensation or
benefits, either direct, or indirect.
Much debate exists as to whether "true" altruism
is possible. The theory of psychological egoism
suggests that no act of sharing, helping or
sacrificing can be described as truly altruistic,
as the actor may receive an intrinsic reward
in the form of personal gratification. The
validity of this argument depends on whether
intrinsic rewards qualify as "benefits."
The term altruism may also refer to an ethical
doctrine that claims that individuals are
morally obliged to benefit others. Used in
this sense, it is usually contrasted with
egoism, which is defined as acting to the
benefit of one's self.
The notion of altruism
The concept has a long history in philosophical
and ethical thought. The term was originally
coined in the 19th century by the founding
sociologist and philosopher of science, Auguste
Comte, and has become a major topic for psychologists,
evolutionary biologists, and ethologists.
Whilst ideas about altruism from one field
can have an impact on the other fields, the
different methods and focuses of these fields
always lead to different perspectives on altruism.
In simple terms, altruism is caring about
the welfare of other people and acting to
help them.
Individual variations
A certain individual may behave altruistically
in one case and egoistically in another situation.
However, some individuals tend to behave more
altruistically, while others tend to behave
more egoistically. Altruism may be considered
a general attitude to the point where altruism
has been considered as a trait.
A 1986 study estimated that altruism was half-inherited.
Another study, by the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, was published in 2009. Also
based on the twin design, the new study estimated
that genetic differences accounted for approximately
20% of individual variations.
Scientific viewpoints
Anthropology
Marcel Mauss's book The Gift contains a passage:
"Note on alms." This note describes the evolution
of the notion of alms from the notion of sacrifice.
In it, he writes:
Alms are the fruits of a moral notion of the
gift and of fortune on the one hand,
and of a notion of sacrifice, on the other.
Generosity is an obligation, because Nemesis
avenges the poor and the gods for the superabundance
of happiness and wealth of certain people
who should rid themselves of it. This is the
ancient morality of the gift, which has become
a principle of justice. The gods and the spirits
accept that the share of wealth and happiness
that has been offered to them and had been
hitherto destroyed in useless sacrifices should
serve the poor and children.
Compare Altruism – perception of altruism
as self-sacrifice.
Compare explanation of alms in various scriptures.
Evolutionary explanations
In the science of ethology, 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.
In evolutionary psychology this may be applied
to a wide range of human behaviors such as
charity, emergency aid, help to coalition
partners, tipping, courtship gifts, production
of public goods, and environmentalism.
Theories of apparently altruistic behavior
were accelerated by the need to produce theories
compatible with evolutionary origins. Two
related strands of research on altruism have
emerged from traditional evolutionary analyses
and from evolutionary game theory a mathematical
model and analysis of behavioural strategies.
Some of the proposed mechanisms are:
Kin selection. That animals and humans are
more altruistic towards close kin than to
distant kin and non-kin has been confirmed
in numerous studies across many different
cultures. Even subtle cues indicating kinship
may unconsciously increase altruistic behavior.
One kinship cue is facial resemblance. One
study found that slightly altering photographs
so that they more closely resembled the faces
of study participants increased the trust
the participants expressed regarding depicted
persons. Another cue is having the same family
name, especially if rare, and this has been
found to increase helping behavior. Another
study found more cooperative behavior the
greater the number the perceived kin in a
group. Using kinship terms in political speeches
increased audience agreement with the speaker
in one study. This effect was especially strong
for firstborns, who are typically close to
their families.
Vested interests. People are likely to suffer
if their friends, allies, and similar social
ingroups suffer or even disappear. Helping
such group members may therefore eventually
benefit the altruist. Making ingroup membership
more noticeable increases cooperativeness.
Extreme self-sacrifice towards the ingroup
may be adaptive if a hostile outgroup threatens
to kill the entire ingroup.
Reciprocal altruism. See also Reciprocity.
Direct reciprocity. Research shows that it
can be beneficial to help others if there
is a chance that they can and will reciprocate
the help. The effective tit for tat strategy
is one game theoretic example. Many people
seem to be following a similar strategy by
cooperating if and only if others cooperate
in return.
One consequence is that people are more cooperative
if it is more likely that individuals will
interact again in the future. People tend
to be less cooperative if they perceive that
the frequency of helpers in the population
is lower. They tend to help less if they see
non-cooperativeness by others and this effect
tend to be stronger than the opposite effect
of seeing cooperative behaviors. Simply changing
the cooperative framing of a proposal may
increase cooperativeness such as calling it
a "Community Game" instead of a "Wall Street
Game."
A tendency towards reciprocity implies that
people will feel obligated to respond if someone
helps them. This has been used by charities
that give small gifts to potential donors
hoping thereby to induce reciprocity. Another
method is to announce publicly that someone
has given a large donation. The tendency to
reciprocate can even generalize so people
become more helpful toward others in general
after being helped. On the other hand, people
will avoid or even retaliate against those
perceived not to be cooperating. People sometimes
mistakenly fail to help when they intended
to, or their helping may not be noticed, which
may cause unintended conflicts. As such, it
may be an optimal strategy to be slightly
forgiving of and have a slightly generous
interpretation of non-cooperation.
People are more likely to cooperate on a task
if they can communicate with one another first.
This may be due to better assessments of cooperativeness
or due to exchange of promises. They are more
cooperative if they can gradually build trust,
instead of being asked to give extensive help
immediately. Direct reciprocity and cooperation
in a group can be increased by changing the
focus and incentives from intra-group competition
to larger scale competitions such as between
groups or against the general population.
Thus, giving grades and promotions based only
on an individual's performance relative to
a small local group, as is common, may reduce
cooperative behaviors in the group.
Indirect reciprocity. The avoidance of poor
reciprocators and cheaters causes a person's
reputation to become very important. A person
with a good reputation for reciprocity have
a higher chance of receiving help even from
persons they have had no direct interactions
with previously.
Strong reciprocity. A form of reciprocity
where some individuals seem to spend more
resources on cooperating and punishing than
would be most beneficial as predicted by several
established theories of altruism. A number
of theories have been proposed as explanations
as well as criticisms regarding its existence.
Pseudo-reciprocity. An organism behaves altruistically
and the recipient does not reciprocate but
has an increased chance of acting in a way
that is selfish but also as a byproduct benefits
the altruist.
Costly signaling and the handicap principle.
Since altruism takes away resources from the
altruist it can be an "honest signal" of resource
availability and the abilities needed to gather
resources. This may signal to others that
the altruist is a valuable potential partner.
It may also be a signal of interactive and
cooperative intentions since those not interacting
further in the future gain nothing from the
costly signaling. It is unclear if costly
signaling can indicate a long-term cooperative
personality but people have increased trust
for those who help. Costly signaling is pointless
if everyone has the same traits, resources,
and cooperative intentions but become a potentially
more important signal if the population increasingly
varies on these characteristics.
Hunters widely sharing the meat has been seen
as a costly signal of ability and research
has found that good hunters have higher reproductive
success and more adulterous relations even
if they themselves receive no more of the
hunted meat than anyone else. Similarly, holding
large feasts and giving large donations has
been seen as ways of demonstrating one's resources.
Heroic risk-taking has also been interpreted
as a costly signal of ability.
Both indirect reciprocity and costly signaling
depend on the value of reputation and tend
to make similar predictions. One is that people
will be more helping when they know that their
helping behavior will be communicated to people
they will interact with later, is publicly
announced, is discussed, or is simply being
observed by someone else. This have been documented
in many studies. The effect is sensitive to
subtle cues such as people being more helpful
when there were stylized eyespots instead
of a logo on a computer screen. Weak reputational
cues such as eyespots may become unimportant
if there are stronger cues present and may
lose their effect with continued exposure
unless reinforced with real reputational effects.
Public displays such as public weeping for
dead celebrities and participation in demonstrations
may be influenced by a desire to be seen as
altruistic. People who know that they are
publicly monitored sometimes even wastefully
donate money they know are not needed by recipient
which may be because of reputational concerns.
Women have been found to find altruistic men
to be attractive partners. When looking for
a long-term partner more conventional altruism
may be preferred which may indicate that he
is also willing to share resources with her
and her children while when looking for a
short-term partner heroic risk-taking, which
may be costly signal showing good genes, may
be more preferable. Men also perform more
altruistic acts in the early stages of a romantic
relationship or simply when in the presence
of an attractive woman. While both sexes state
that kindness is the most preferable trait
in a partner there is some evidence that men
place less value on this than women and that
women may not be more altruistic in presence
of an attractive man. Men may even avoid altruistic
women in short-term relationships which may
be because they expect less success.
People may compete over getting the benefits
of a high reputation which may cause competitive
altruism. On other hand, in some experiments
a proportion of people do not seem to care
about reputation and they do not help more
even if this is conspicuous. This may possibly
be due to reasons such as psychopathy or that
they are so attractive that they need not
be seen to be altruistic. The reputational
benefits of altruism occur in the future as
compared to the immediate costs of altruism
in the present. While humans and other organisms
generally place less value on future costs/benefits
as compared to those in the present, some
have shorter time horizons than others and
these people tend to be less cooperative.
Explicit extrinsic rewards and punishments
have been found to sometimes actually have
the opposite effect on behaviors compared
to intrinsic rewards. This may be because
such extrinsic, top-down incentives may replace
intrinsic and reputational incentives, motivating
the person to focus on obtaining the extrinsic
rewards, which overall may make the behaviors
less desirable. Another effect is that people
would like altruism to be due to a personality
characteristic rather than due to overt reputational
concerns and simply pointing out that there
are reputational benefits of an action may
actually reduce them. This may possibly be
used as derogatory tactic against altruists,
especially by those who are non-cooperators.
A counterargument is that doing good due to
reputational concerns is better than doing
no good at all.
Group selection. It has controversially been
argued by some evolutionary scientists such
as E. O. Wilson that natural selection can
act at the level of non-kin groups to produce
adaptations that benefit a non-kin group even
if these adaptions are detrimental at the
individual level. Thus, while altruistic persons
may under some circumstances be outcompeted
by less altruistic persons at the individual
level, according to group selection theory
the opposite may occur at the group level
where groups consisting of the more altruistic
persons may outcompete groups consisting of
the less altruistic persons. Such altruism
may only extend to ingroup members while there
may instead prejudice and antagonism against
outgroup members. Group selection theory has
been criticized by many other evolutionary
scientists.
Such explanations do not imply that humans
are always consciously calculating how to
increase their inclusive fitness when they
are doing altruistic acts. Instead, evolution
has shaped psychological mechanisms, such
as emotions, that promote altruistic behaviors.
Every single instance of altruistic behavior
need not always increase inclusive fitness;
altruistic behaviors would have been selected
for if such behaviors on average increased
inclusive fitness in the ancestral environment.
This need not imply that on average 50% or
more of altruistic acts were beneficial for
the altruist in the ancestral environment;
if the benefits from helping the right person
were very high it would be beneficial to err
on the side of caution and usually be altruistic
even if in most cases there were no benefits.
The benefits for the altruist may be increased
and the costs reduced by being more altruistic
towards certain groups. Research has found
that people are more altruistic to kin than
to no-kin, to friends than to strangers, to
those attractive than to those unattractive,
to non-competitors than to competitors, and
to members ingroups than to members of outgroup.
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.
Selective investment theory proposes that
close social bonds, and associated emotional,
cognitive, and neurohormonal mechanisms, evolved
in order to facilitate long-term, high-cost
altruism between those closely depending on
one another for survival and reproductive
success.
Such cooperative behaviors have sometimes
been seen as arguments for left-wing politics
such by the Russian zoologist and anarchist
Peter Kropotkin in his 1902 book Mutual Aid:
A Factor of Evolution and Peter Singer in
his book A Darwinian Left.
Most recently, Jeremy Griffith has proposed
a biological theory for the development of
truly altruistic instincts that accommodates
the biological imperative to reproduce, as
evidenced by a moral conscience visible in
humans today.
Neurobiology
Jorge Moll and Jordan Grafman, neuroscientists
at the National Institutes of Health and LABS-D'Or
Hospital Network 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, 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 the 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.
Another experiment funded by the National
Institutes of Health and conducted in 2007
at the Duke University in Durham, North Carolina
suggests a different view, "that altruistic
behavior may originate from how people view
the world rather than how they act in it."
In the study published in the February 2007
print issue of Nature Neuroscience, researchers
have found a part of the brain that behaves
differently for altruistic and selfish people.
The researchers invited 45 volunteers to play
a computer game and also to watch the computer
play the game. In some rounds, the game resulted
in the volunteers winning money for themselves,
and in others it resulted in money being donated
to a charity of the volunteer's choice. During
these activities, the researchers took functional
magnetic resonance imaging scans of the participants'
brains and were "surprised by the results".
Although they "were expecting to see activity
in the brain's reward centers," based on the
idea that "people perform altruistic acts
because they feel good about it," what they
found was that "another part of the brain
was also involved, and it was quite sensitive
to the difference between doing something
for personal gain and doing it for someone
else's gain." That part of the brain is called
the posterior superior temporal cortex.
In the next stage, the scientists asked the
participants some questions about type and
frequency of their altruistic or helping behaviours.
They then analysed the responses to generate
an estimate of a person's tendency to act
altruistically and compared each person's
level of altruism against their fMRI brain
scan. The results showed that pSTC activity
rose in proportion to a person's self-reported
level of altruism. According to the researchers,
the results suggest that altruistic behavior
may originate from how people view the world
rather than how they act in it. "We believe
that the ability to perceive other people's
actions as meaningful is critical for altruism,"
said lead study investigator Dharol Tankersley.
Psychology
The International Encyclopedia of the Social
Sciences defines psychological altruism as
"a motivational state with the goal of increasing
another’s welfare." Psychological altruism
is contrasted with psychological egoism, which
refers to the motivation to increase one’s
own welfare.
There has been some debate on whether or not
humans are truly capable of psychological
altruism. Some definitions specify a self-sacrificial
nature to altruism and a lack of external
rewards for altruistic behaviors. However,
because altruism ultimately benefits the self
in many cases, the selflessness of altruistic
acts is brought to question. The social exchange
theory postulates that altruism only exists
when benefits outweigh costs. Daniel Batson
is a psychologist who examined this question
and argues against the social exchange theory.
He identified four major motives for altruism:
altruism to ultimately benefit the self, to
ultimately benefit the other person, to benefit
a group, or to uphold a moral principle. Altruism
that ultimately serves selfish gains is thus
differentiated from selfless altruism, but
the general conclusion has been that empathy-induced
altruism can be genuinely selfless. The empathy-altruism
hypothesis basically states that psychological
altruism does exist and is evoked by the empathic
desire to help someone who is suffering. Feelings
of empathic concern are contrasted with feelings
of personal distress, which compel people
to reduce their own unpleasant emotions. People
with empathic concern help others in distress
even when exposure to the situation could
be easily avoided, whereas those lacking in
empathic concern avoid helping unless it is
difficult or impossible to avoid exposure
to another's suffering. Helping behavior is
seen in humans at about two years old, when
a toddler is capable of understanding subtle
emotional cues.
In psychological research on altruism, studies
often observe altruism as demonstrated through
prosocial behaviors such as helping, comforting,
sharing, cooperation, philanthropy, and community
service. Research has found that people are
most likely to help if they recognize that
a person is in need and feel personal responsibility
for reducing the person's distress. Research
also suggests that the number of bystanders
witnessing distress or suffering affects the
likelihood of helping. Greater numbers of
bystanders decrease individual feelings of
responsibility. However, a witness with a
high level of empathic concern is likely to
assume personal responsibility entirely regardless
of the number of bystanders. A feeling of
personal responsibility or - moral norm - has
also strongly been associated with other pro-social
behaviors such as charitable giving.
Many studies have observed the effects of
volunteerism on happiness and health and have
consistently found a strong connection between
volunteerism and current and future health
and well-being. In a study of older adults,
those who volunteered were significantly higher
on life satisfaction and will to live, and
significantly lower in depression, anxiety,
and somatization. Volunteerism and helping
behavior have not only been shown to improve
mental health, but physical health and longevity
as well. One study examined the physical health
of mothers who volunteered over a 30-year
period and found that 52% of those who did
not belong to a volunteer organization experienced
a major illness while only 36% of those who
did volunteer experienced one. A study on
adults ages 55+ found that during the four-year
study period, people who volunteered for two
or more organizations had a 63% lower likelihood
of dying. After controlling for prior health
status, it was determined that volunteerism
accounted for a 44% reduction in mortality.
Merely being aware of kindness in oneself
and others is also associated with greater
well-being. A study that asked participants
to count each act of kindness they performed
for one week significantly enhanced their
subjective happiness. It is important to note
that, while research supports the idea that
altruistic acts bring about happiness, it
has also been found to work in the opposite
direction—that happier people are also kinder.
The relationship between altruistic behavior
and happiness is bidirectional. Studies have
found that generosity increases linearly from
sad to happy affective states. Studies have
also been careful to note that feeling over-taxed
by the needs of others has conversely negative
effects on health and happiness. For example,
one study on volunteerism found that feeling
overwhelmed by others' demands had an even
stronger negative effect on mental health
than helping had a positive one. Additionally,
while generous acts make people feel good
about themselves, it is also important for
people to appreciate the kindness they receive
from others. Studies suggest that gratitude
goes hand-in-hand with kindness and is also
very important for our well-being. A study
on the relationship happiness to various character
strengths showed that "a conscious focus on
gratitude led to reductions in negative affect
and increases in optimistic appraisals, positive
affect, offering emotional support, sleep
quality, and well-being.". Psychologists generally
refer to this virtuous cycle of helping others,
doing good and subsequently feeling good as
"the helper's high".
Sociology
"Sociologists have long been concerned with
how to build the good society". The structure
of our societies and how individuals come
to exhibit charitable, philanthropic, and
other pro-social, altruistic actions for the
common good is a largely researched topic
within the field. The American Sociology Association
acknowledges Public sociology saying, "The
intrinsic scientific, policy, and public relevance
of this field of investigation in helping
to construct 'good societies' is unquestionable".
This type of sociology seeks contributions
that aid grassroots and theoretical understandings
of what motivates altruism and how it is organized,
and promotes an altruistic focus in order
to benefit the world and people it studies.
How altruism is framed, organized, carried
out, and what motivates it at the group level
is an area of focus that sociologists seek
to investigate in order to contribute back
to the groups it studies and "build the good
society".
Religious viewpoints
Most, if not all, of the world's religions
promote altruism as a very important moral
value. Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam,
Jainism, Judaism and Sikhism, etc., place
particular emphasis on altruistic morality.
Buddhism
Altruism figures prominently in Buddhism.
Love and compassion are components of all
forms of Buddhism, and are focused on all
beings equally: love is the wish that all
beings be happy, and compassion is the wish
that all beings be free from suffering. "Many
illnesses can be cured by the one medicine
of love and compassion. These qualities are
the ultimate source of human happiness, and
the need for them lies at the very core of
our being".
Since "all beings" includes the individual,
love and compassion in Buddhism are outside
the opposition between self and other. It
is even said that the distinction between
self and other is part of the root cause of
our suffering. In practical terms, however,
since most of us are spontaneously self-centered,
Buddhism encourages us to focus love and compassion
on others, and thus can be characterized as
"altruistic." Many would agree with the Dalai
Lama that Buddhism as a religion is kindness
toward others.
Still, the notion of altruism is modified
in such a world-view, since the belief is
that such a practice promotes our own happiness:
"The more we care for the happiness of others,
the greater our own sense of well-being becomes".
In the context of larger ethical discussions
on moral action and judgment, Buddhism is
characterized by the belief that negative
consequences of our actions derive not from
punishment or correction based on moral judgment,
but from the law of karma, which functions
like a natural law of cause and effect. A
simple illustration of such cause and effect
is the case of experiencing the effects of
what I cause: if I cause suffering, then as
a natural consequence I will experience suffering;
if I cause happiness, then as a natural consequence
I will experience happiness.
In Buddhism, karma is strictly distinguished
from vipāka, meaning "fruit" or "result".
Karma is categorized within the group or groups
of cause in the chain of cause and effect,
where it comprises the elements of "volitional
activities" and "action". Any action is understood
to create "seeds" in the mind that sprout
into the appropriate results when they meet
the right conditions. Most types of karmas,
with good or bad results, will keep one in
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
motivation also includes the aspect of ignorance;
so a well-intended action from an ignorant
mind can easily be "bad" in that it creates
unpleasant results for the "actor."
In Buddhism, karma is not the only cause of
all that happens. As taught in the early texts,
the commentarial tradition classified causal
mechanisms governing the universe in five
categories, known as Niyama Dhammas:
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
Jainism
The fundamental principles of Jainism revolve
around the concept of altruism, not only for
humans but for all sentient beings. Jainism
preaches the view of Ahimsa – to live and
let live, thereby not harming sentient beings,
i.e. uncompromising reverence for all life.
It also considers all living things to be
equal. The first Thirthankar, Rishabh introduced
the concept of altruism for all living beings,
from extending knowledge and experience to
others to donation, giving oneself up for
others, non-violence and compassion for all
living things.
Jainism prescribes a path of non-violence
to progress the soul to this ultimate goal.
Jains believe that to attain enlightenment
and ultimately liberation, one must practice
the following ethical principles in thought,
speech and action. The degree to which these
principles are practiced is different for
householders and monks. They are:
Non-violence;
Truthfulness;
Non-stealing;
Celibacy;
Non-possession or non-materialism;
A major characteristic of Jain belief is the
emphasis on the consequences of not only physical
but also mental behaviors. One's unconquered
mind with anger, pride, deceit, greed and
uncontrolled sense organs are the powerful
enemies of humans. Anger spoils good relations,
pride destroys humility, deceit destroys peace
and greed destroys everything. Jainism recommends
conquering anger by forgiveness, pride by
humility, deceit by straight-forwardness and
greed by contentment.
The principle of non-violence seeks to minimize
karmas which limit the capabilities of the
soul. Jainism views every soul as worthy of
respect because it has the potential to become
Siddha. Because all living beings possess
a soul, great care and awareness is essential
in one's actions. Jainism emphasizes the equality
of all life, advocating harmlessness towards
all, whether the creatures are great or small.
This policy extends even to microscopic organisms.
Jainism acknowledges that every person has
different capabilities and capacities to practice
and therefore accepts different levels of
compliance for ascetics and householders.
The "great vows" are prescribed for monks
and "limited vows" are prescribed for householders.
In other words, the house-holders are encouraged
to practice the five cardinal principles of
non-violence, truthfulness, non-stealing,
celibacy and non-possessiveness with their
current practical limitations while the monks
have to observe them very strictly. With consistent
practice, it will be possible to overcome
the limitations gradually, accelerating the
spiritual progress.
Christianity
Altruism is 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. Love
confirms others in their freedom, shuns propaganda
and masks, assures others of its presence,
and 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 becomes
validated and grasped not by words and reflections
alone, but in the making of the connection.
St Thomas Aquinas interprets 'You should love
your neighbour as yourself' as meaning that
love for ourselves is the exemplar of love
for others. Considering that "the love with
which a man loves himself is the form and
root of friendship" and quotes Aristotle that
"the origin of friendly relations with others
lies in our relations to ourselves," he concluded
that though we are not bound to love others
more than ourselves, we naturally seek the
common good, the good of the whole, more than
any private good, the good of a part. However,
he thinks we should love God more than ourselves
and our neighbours, and more than our bodily
life—since the ultimate purpose of loving
our neighbour is to share in eternal beatitude:
a more desirable thing than bodily well being.
In coining the word Altruism, as stated above,
Comte was probably opposing this Thomistic
doctrine, which is present in some theological
schools within Catholicism.
Many biblical authors draw a strong connection
between love of others and love of God. 1
John 4 states that for one to love God one
must love his fellowman, and that hatred of
one's fellowman is the same as hatred of God.
Thomas Jay Oord has argued in several books
that altruism is but one possible form of
love. An altruistic action is not always a
loving action. Oord defines altruism as acting
for the other's good, and he agrees with feminists
who note that sometimes love requires acting
for one's own good when the other's demands
undermine overall well-being.
German philosopher Max Scheler distinguishes
two ways in which the strong can help the
weak. One way is a sincere expression of Christian
love, "motivated by a powerful feeling of
security, strength, and inner salvation, of
the invincible fullness of one’s own life
and existence". Another way is merely "one
of the many modern substitutes for love, ... nothing
but the urge to turn away from oneself and
to lose oneself in other people’s business."
At its worst, Scheler says, "love for the
small, the poor, the weak, and the oppressed
is really disguised hatred, repressed envy,
an impulse to detract, etc., directed against
the opposite phenomena: wealth, strength,
power, largesse."
Islam
In Islam, the concept 'īthār' is the notion
of 'preferring others to oneself'. For Sufis,
this means devotion to others through complete
forgetfulness of one's own concerns, where
concern for others is rooted to be a demand
made by Allah on the human body, considered
to be property of Allah alone. The importance
lies in sacrifice for the sake of the greater
good; Islam considers those practicing īthār
as abiding by the highest degree of nobility.
This is similar to the notion of chivalry,
but unlike that European concept, in i'thar
attention is focused on everything in existence.
A constant concern for Allah results in a
careful attitude towards people, animals,
and other things in this world. This concept
was emphasized by Sufis of Islam like Rabia
al-Adawiyya who paid attention to the difference
between dedication to Allah and dedication
to people. Thirteenth-century Turkish Sufi
poet Yunus Emre explained this philosophy
as "Yaratılanı severiz, Yaratandan ötürü"
or We love the creature, because of The Creator.
For many Muslims, i'thar must be practiced
as a religious obligation during specific
Islamic holidays. However, i'thar is also
still an Islamic ideal to which all Muslims
should strive to adhere at all times.
Judaism
Judaism defines altruism as the desired goal
of creation. The famous Rabbi Abraham Isaac
Kook stated that love is the most important
attribute in humanity. This is defined as
bestowal, or giving, which is the intention
of altruism. This can be altruism towards
humanity that leads to altruism towards the
creator or God. Kabbalah defines God as the
force of giving in existence. Rabbi Moshe
Chaim Luzzatto in particular focused on the
'purpose of creation' and how the will of
God was to bring creation into perfection
and adhesion with this upper force.
Modern Kabbalah developed by Rabbi Yehuda
Ashlag, in his writings about the future generation,
focuses on how society could achieve an altruistic
social framework. Ashlag proposed that such
a framework is the purpose of creation, and
everything that happens is to raise humanity
to the level of altruism, love for one another.
Ashlag focused on society and its relation
to divinity.
Sikhism
Altruism is essential to the Sikh religion.
The central faith in Sikhism is that the greatest
deed any one can do is to imbibe and live
the godly qualities like love, affection,
sacrifice, patience, harmony, truthfulness.
The fifth Nanak, Guru Arjun Dev Sacrificed
his life to uphold 22 Carats of pure truth,
the greatest gift to humanity, the Guru Granth.
The Ninth Nanak, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sacrificed
his head to protect weak and defenseless people
against atrocity. In the late 17th century,
Guru Gobind Singh Ji, 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.
Hinduism
Advaita Vedanta differs from the view that
karma is a law of cause and effect but instead
additionally hold that karma is mediated by
the will of a personal supreme god. This view
of karma is in contradiction to Buddhism,
Jainism and other Indian religions that do
view karma as a law of cause and effect.
Swami Sivananda, an Advaita scholar, reiterates
the same views in his commentary synthesising
Vedanta views on the Brahma Sutras, a Vedantic
text. In his commentary on Chapter 3 of the
Brahma Sutras, Sivananda notes that karma
is insentient and short-lived, and ceases
to exist as soon as a deed is executed. Hence,
karma cannot bestow the fruits of actions
at a future date according to one's merit.
Furthermore, one cannot argue that karma generates
apurva or punya, which gives fruit. Since
apurva is non-sentient, it cannot act unless
moved by an intelligent being such as a god.
It cannot independently bestow reward or punishment.
Philosophy
There exists a wide range of philosophical
views on man's obligations or motivations
to act altruistically. Proponents of ethical
altruism maintain that individuals are morally
obligated to act altruistically. The opposing
view is ethical egoism, which maintains that
moral agents should always act in their own
self-interest. Both ethical altruism and ethical
egoism contrast with utilitarianism, which
is the view that every individual's well-being
is of equal moral importance.
A related concept in descriptive ethics is
psychological egoism, the thesis that humans
always act in their own self-interest and
that true altruism is impossible. Rational
egoism is the view that rationality consists
in acting in one's self-interest.
See also
Notes
References
Bibliography
External links
General
Altruism on In Our Time at the BBC.
"Radiolab: "The Good Show"". Season 9. Episode
1. 14 December 2011. WNYC. http:www.radiolab.orgdec.
Society
What is Altruism? from Altruists International
Philosophy and religion
"Giving and Receiving" from Kabbalah.info
Selflessness: Toward a Buddhist Vision of
Social Justice by Sungtaek Cho
Science
Altruism: Myth or Reality?, by Dan Batson
and Nadia Ahmad
Biological Altruism entry in the Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Altruistic Personality and Prosocial Behavior
Institute at Humboldt State University
Dharol Tankersley, C. Jill Stowe & Scott A.
Huettel. "Altruism is associated with an increased
neural response to agency". Nature 10: 150–151.
doi:10.1038/nn1833. PMID 17237779. 
"Unraveling altruism, conscience, and condemnation"
