Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to Jumpin Bejesus
I don't mean to split hairs, Gome...
I think the concept of Altruism has caused a lot of human suffering, and has been used to justify a lot of unwanted intrusion into the private lives of people: "It's for their own good!" It is interesting that most "altruists" are from the political "left," and are more guilty than most of twisting the motives of people who don't agree with them. In the final analysis, altruism rewards the underachiever at the expense of the accomplished.
posted by
arGee
on October 9, 2007 at 6:55 AM
| link to this | reply
arGee - I can't disagree with what you are saying but can't help but feel
that you are splitting hairs to a certain extent.
"Enlightened self interest" may be a better term to use in this instance but it is in effect exactly what I am saying when I qualify "altruistic" in this manner: " . . . can only be an individual's effort to be honest and alltruistic". Viewing life through a perspective of self interest is a given pertaining to human behaviour, the only modification of which that we can demand from our fellow citizens being the consideration of their social responsibilities when doing so.
posted by
gomedome
on October 8, 2007 at 4:57 PM
| link to this | reply
Regarding Altruism, Gome...
I have come to believe that altruism is a human vice – NOT a human virtue. I would rather see people exhibit "enlightened self-interest." I find that those who profess altruism cannot ultimately be trusted. Their motives become suspect, especially in light of the obvious fact that humans don't appear to be wired to put another's interest before their own interest. "Enlightened self-interest" does not imply a me-and-mine attitude before a you-and-yours, but rather an approach to life that openly acknowledges that if I don't take care of myself, there is no possibility that I can do anything for anyone else.
Here is a simple example: I am in a crowded elevator, near the door. When the door opens at my floor, I step out first, rather than pushing back to let others out before me. Everybody benefits from my enlightened self-interest.
Another example: I see to my personal finances first. Then, if there is anything left over, I can donate to a charitable organization. If I donate first, I may not have sufficient left over to take care o my own needs, ultimately making me dependent on others.
It's really another way of looking at what people actually do every day. And it puts the action of the altruist in a different light – forcing you to look at his or her true motives.
posted by
arGee
on October 8, 2007 at 4:42 PM
| link to this | reply
FineYoungSinger - there are a few around here that may argue about my being
arrogant, a word it seems that is levied against anyone showing impatience with mindless drivel.
I wouldn't want anything that I have posted to change anyone's mind about their beliefs, even if it were possible. I feel the very most we can hope for are planting some seeds of food for thought and illustrating some of the inequities routinely proliferated by a believing majority.
posted by
gomedome
on October 8, 2007 at 10:41 AM
| link to this | reply
arGee - using a term such as "intellectual honesty" implies that all
persons are capable of rational thought.
Even the implication of intelligence could be troublesome when attempting to use a term that is all encompassing for all people. In this regard I feel that alltruistic works, especially in light of its definition:
Having or showing an unselfish concern for others. Thesaurus: humanitarian, self-sacrificing, unselfish, benevolent, public-spirited, self-abnegating, charitable, philanthropic, generous, noble, noble-hearted, humane, kind.
posted by
gomedome
on October 8, 2007 at 10:30 AM
| link to this | reply
No matter the evidence, or lack thereof, I believe still.
Nothing I could say here would change your mind, and nothing you've posted here makes me sit back and say, "Jumpin Jehosaphat! What have I been thinking???"
All I can offer, as a believer that knows what she knows and believes what she believes for her own personal reasons, is a thumbs-up to for expressing your views and beliefs fearlessly, and my respect to your honesty and integrity without being arrogant about it.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on October 8, 2007 at 8:57 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: callista22001 - I have a bit of a problem with both of those analogies
Why altruistic, Gome? What's wrong with simple intellectual honesty?
posted by
arGee
on October 8, 2007 at 6:09 AM
| link to this | reply
callista22001 - I have a bit of a problem with both of those analogies
We are sentient, self aware beings, . . . not insects. If however the analogy dug a bit deeper and was representative of us being pets to some omnipotent being or insignificant in absolute terms, I can agree to a certain extent.
The hedging bets part is where I really take exception. As a crazed bible thumper once remarked in a very rare moment of lucidity: "God did not give us our brains to ding us later for using them" . . . (even a broken clock tells the right time twice a day)
The "hedge" can only be an individual's effort to be honest and alltruistic, it can be nothing more, not if this alleged being epitomizes all good qualities.
posted by
gomedome
on October 7, 2007 at 9:13 PM
| link to this | reply
if you've ever had an ant farm, you enjoy watching the insects hard at work
but you don't have alot of input and more than likely you don't want any, this is how i feel about god, if there is a god, i go back and forth. and then what it comes down to is i want to cover all my bases, i dont want to be wrong. so i read, and in the end, it will all come down to what i am comfortable with i guess.
posted by
callista22001
on October 7, 2007 at 7:19 PM
| link to this | reply
posted by
richinstore
on October 6, 2007 at 10:07 PM
| link to this | reply