Hey this is one of the best videos that I have watched lately. And I think you explained the point very clearly and convincingly. Thanks very much. I truly think this is an important topic and more people should watch this videos.
A lot of people say there is no such thing as altruism. This could be because the ego must see itself as 'good'. You said there is no such thing as a selfless good deed but I disageee. Some people cannot sense an inner self though there is one.
What I think is if the gratification unbeknownst to the person at the time of the deed, then it's purely altruistic in it's intent. If pleasure is a by product that they weren't expecting then you would think that's a pure version of it in that moment.
Thank you for your comment, which raises two interesting points: 1) whether or not the agent is aware of the target's gratitude; 2) whether or not the agent expects a sense of pleasure from doing the good deed. Both are important. I do plan to make a follow-up vid on this one, these points will be addressed.
Also a small unsolicited suggestion: at the end of this video you mentioned that you have other videos about the altruism topic. It might be helpful to have the link in the video description part so people (like me) can watch all of them without having to search throughout the playlists. Thanks again for the excellent content!
I just had a debate with a fellow college psychology student about this, I have the stance that altruism does not exist. And even in a biological standpoint the chemical reaction gives a positive reinforcement, or you subconsciously view your self as a "Hero".
Well, you're wrong. A couple reasons why. First of all, even if you get a satisfaction from doing an altruistic deed, that doesn't mean you did it for that reason. It's simply a byproduct of your selfless character. Second, you will not have time to have any chemical reaction if you act out of altruistic instict to save someone that you just saw drowning for example. Third, the definition given in this video is incorrect and formulated like this for the sole reason to prove a point. Altruism doesn't necessarily rule out benefit to the self. For example, if I sacrifice a lot of time helping someone and did it without any expectations of a reward but that person ended up rewarding me anyway, then that doesn't change the fact that the helping behavior was out of pure altruism.
This was a topic I thought about a lot while on a spiritual retreat. Basically this retreat was based on how being of service to others is the key to enlightenment, and that if you make it a point to anonymously do good deeds for others eveyday for 90 days, you will see significant, positive changes in your mental and spiritual fortitude.
Yes, I'm it, and I can tell you every little thing about it. A good Samaritan. You need to study the Hamilton Rule. The altruist must experience this in the formidable years. Then carry it out, for the next five years, as a practicing altruist. You must be born into the environment. Complete empathy, humble, selfless. The person needs to have siblings, who are in need of help. I was born almost two years after my brother, he had no athletic ability, or social skills, a mamas boy in the making, he was a bed wetter. My sister, two years younger, born blind and autistic. I am a perfect child. That's the beginning of pure altruism.
What if, you give away all your belongings to someone you don't know, knowing you will forget about it seconds later thus eliminating any intrinsic rewards.
1. That's not a real-world scenario, and I don't even see how that's possible 2. That still wouldn't fit the definition of pure altruism, because in that scenario, there would be no cost for the person giving away their belongings. Sure, they'd be giving away everything they own, so it's easy to look at that as a huge cost. But they also know that they won't remember giving it away, so why would they care? If you give away everything you own, knowing you'll have 0 memory of it immediately after it happens, you're not *really* losing anything. Physically, you are losing a lot. But you won't ever know about it or have to think about it in any capacity.
@@FuckFascistUA-cam Yep, & they're still giving their belongs away for a reason. I wonder what their motivation would be in that moment. Do they feel they need to do it in order to do the right thing? Does it make them feel good to help someone in that moment?
Before watching the full video, I would like to say I don’t believe in pure altruism or selflessness. For an action to be selfless, I believe that an action must be done without the self in mind, but the idea of action goes against the idea of selflessness. There is a prompt, an action must be done in response, thus satisfying the demands of the prompt. A Guy dives into a burning building to save some people, losing his life in the process. While that is the case that he helped people and died doing so, he still felt a personal demand to do such thing, that personal demand is what drove him to act in that way, logically making the act selfish. I believe a truly selfless act would need to be done without the conscious, for example, a dead body in the woods alerts a group of kids of nearby danger, so they go and run home. The person did not intend to help anyone, as they had no knowledge of anyone else in the area and even if they did, it would be likely they were more focused on getting away from the killer themselves than trying to help anyone. That’s an example of a truly selfless act. Selfless isn’t inherently good, it’s in the name, an action that is done without the self, without conscious intent.
Using your head dude; You don’t need outside sources to make a new realization, the whole “where are your sources” thing is just an attempt for naysayers to lazily dismiss someone’s claims and ideas
I had evil boyfriend who, just live in my home and not pay momey, not working, only devoured my food and don't let me rest. 1 This was benefition for him 2 this is not revarding to me 3 this cost and hurt me a lot Is this are altruistic? This was against my will, do this count as pure altruistic?
Probably was still a hidden benefit for you. Of course I don’t know the specifics. So here some possible pointer on the top off my head for continuing to stay with it. - attention - conflict avoidance
how does this only have 800 views..I believe there is no such thing as altruism. there are no examples of altruism. only thing I can think of is Jesus dying on the cross but i dont believe in that
I think that most people would not agree with you, but I do agree. We humans have an enormous need to think ourselves as being basically good. Even criminals plotting their next crime think themselves to be basically good. And we love to point to small acts of "altruism" as proof of our goodness.
Matthew Tenney Being altruistic just isn't in our genes. Ppl don't want to believe that we are self serving creatures but thats the truth. doesnt mean we cant make other people happy and improve other peoples lives but we get somethint out of it
Not any significant cost though. And even if it was a huge cost (let's say the person has major back issues or something that makes bending down very difficult), they're still only really doing it to feel that sense of self-satisfaction
2 years later and this video is still great. Nice voice and amazing writing and creating this video. :)
Thanks again! 😀
Hey this is one of the best videos that I have watched lately. And I think you explained the point very clearly and convincingly. Thanks very much. I truly think this is an important topic and more people should watch this videos.
Thanks!
A lot of people say there is no such thing as altruism. This could be because the ego must see itself as 'good'.
You said there is no such thing as a selfless good deed but I disageee.
Some people cannot sense an inner self though there is one.
very nice coverage of the subject matter
What I think is if the gratification unbeknownst to the person at the time of the deed, then it's purely altruistic in it's intent. If pleasure is a by product that they weren't expecting then you would think that's a pure version of it in that moment.
Thank you for your comment, which raises two interesting points: 1) whether or not the agent is aware of the target's gratitude; 2) whether or not the agent expects a sense of pleasure from doing the good deed. Both are important. I do plan to make a follow-up vid on this one, these points will be addressed.
@@RanywayzRandom That's great man, can't wait to watch it!
Very well explained
Also a small unsolicited suggestion: at the end of this video you mentioned that you have other videos about the altruism topic. It might be helpful to have the link in the video description part so people (like me) can watch all of them without having to search throughout the playlists. Thanks again for the excellent content!
Much appreciated! Only in this case, I have not yet made the follow-up vid. When I do, I will link it to this one... :-)
@@RanywayzRandom so you just lied to your audience
@@RanywayzRandom yes please make follow up video!
I just had a debate with a fellow college psychology student about this, I have the stance that altruism does not exist. And even in a biological standpoint the chemical reaction gives a positive reinforcement, or you subconsciously view your self as a "Hero".
Well, you're wrong. A couple reasons why. First of all, even if you get a satisfaction from doing an altruistic deed, that doesn't mean you did it for that reason. It's simply a byproduct of your selfless character. Second, you will not have time to have any chemical reaction if you act out of altruistic instict to save someone that you just saw drowning for example. Third, the definition given in this video is incorrect and formulated like this for the sole reason to prove a point. Altruism doesn't necessarily rule out benefit to the self. For example, if I sacrifice a lot of time helping someone and did it without any expectations of a reward but that person ended up rewarding me anyway, then that doesn't change the fact that the helping behavior was out of pure altruism.
@@nvmffs u would never in ur life help someone with nothing in return, u dont have free will.
@@imeltsnowflakes818 What do you mean we don't have free will?
@@nvmffs don’t listen to him he didn’t have the free will to make that dumb comment and neither do I apparently…
This was a topic I thought about a lot while on a spiritual retreat. Basically this retreat was based on how being of service to others is the key to enlightenment, and that if you make it a point to anonymously do good deeds for others eveyday for 90 days, you will see significant, positive changes in your mental and spiritual fortitude.
Phillip Roc still not altruistic because you feel good about yourself for doing it
Cant find your other video on pure altruism can someone link it
Yes, I'm it, and I can tell you every little thing about it. A good Samaritan. You need to study the Hamilton Rule. The altruist must experience this in the formidable years. Then carry it out, for the next five years, as a practicing altruist. You must be born into the environment. Complete empathy, humble, selfless. The person needs to have siblings, who are in need of help. I was born almost two years after my brother, he had no athletic ability, or social skills, a mamas boy in the making, he was a bed wetter. My sister, two years younger, born blind and autistic. I am a perfect child. That's the beginning of pure altruism.
Well done!
Thank you, madam. Although I suspect you are more positive about the appearance of Ms. Buffay-Hannigan than my performance... :P
This requires an assumption, that helping others gives people the automatic emotion of pleasure, and not another emotion
what if you i do altruist things and don’t feel good after
What if, you give away all your belongings to someone you don't know, knowing you will forget about it seconds later thus eliminating any intrinsic rewards.
God? Universal good, karma? Half of our motivations are sub concious anyways.
1. That's not a real-world scenario, and I don't even see how that's possible
2. That still wouldn't fit the definition of pure altruism, because in that scenario, there would be no cost for the person giving away their belongings. Sure, they'd be giving away everything they own, so it's easy to look at that as a huge cost. But they also know that they won't remember giving it away, so why would they care? If you give away everything you own, knowing you'll have 0 memory of it immediately after it happens, you're not *really* losing anything. Physically, you are losing a lot. But you won't ever know about it or have to think about it in any capacity.
@@FuckFascistUA-cam Yeah you're right. Interesting topic :)
@@FuckFascistUA-cam Yep, & they're still giving their belongs away for a reason.
I wonder what their motivation would be in that moment. Do they feel they need to do it in order to do the right thing? Does it make them feel good to help someone in that moment?
May I know where you got your sources?
Introspection and basic critical thinking
Before watching the full video, I would like to say I don’t believe in pure altruism or selflessness. For an action to be selfless, I believe that an action must be done without the self in mind, but the idea of action goes against the idea of selflessness. There is a prompt, an action must be done in response, thus satisfying the demands of the prompt. A Guy dives into a burning building to save some people, losing his life in the process. While that is the case that he helped people and died doing so, he still felt a personal demand to do such thing, that personal demand is what drove him to act in that way, logically making the act selfish. I believe a truly selfless act would need to be done without the conscious, for example, a dead body in the woods alerts a group of kids of nearby danger, so they go and run home. The person did not intend to help anyone, as they had no knowledge of anyone else in the area and even if they did, it would be likely they were more focused on getting away from the killer themselves than trying to help anyone. That’s an example of a truly selfless act. Selfless isn’t inherently good, it’s in the name, an action that is done without the self, without conscious intent.
thank u very helpful
Well explained but where are th sources
Using your head dude; You don’t need outside sources to make a new realization, the whole “where are your sources” thing is just an attempt for naysayers to lazily dismiss someone’s claims and ideas
Bending to pick up a pen can require physical risk. People have hurt their backs doing less. So picking it up for someone costs one risk.
It's still not truly altruistic though
So altruism is giving no matter what nor matter who, helping has no boundries.
I had evil boyfriend who, just live in my home and not pay momey, not working, only devoured my food and don't let me rest.
1 This was benefition for him
2 this is not revarding to me
3 this cost and hurt me a lot
Is this are altruistic? This was against my will, do this count as pure altruistic?
evil genius 😈
Maybe i was just victim 😔
I'm so glad, he not live with me anymore.
Probably was still a hidden benefit for you. Of course I don’t know the specifics. So here some possible pointer on the top off my head for continuing to stay with it.
- attention
- conflict avoidance
❤
I'm definitely not Altruistic.
How about saving a person from a burning building?
Lmao look how many people don't get it and it's not complicated
This video is splitting hairs of definition of a word instead of understanding human benefit of the definition.
Mutuaizm looks way better then altruistic
how does this only have 800 views..I believe there is no such thing as altruism. there are no examples of altruism. only thing I can think of is Jesus dying on the cross but i dont believe in that
Thanks, Jacob, for your positive comment! :-)
I think that most people would not agree with you, but I do agree. We humans have an enormous need to think ourselves as being basically good. Even criminals plotting their next crime think themselves to be basically good. And we love to point to small acts of "altruism" as proof of our goodness.
Matthew Tenney Being altruistic just isn't in our genes. Ppl don't want to believe that we are self serving creatures but thats the truth. doesnt mean we cant make other people happy and improve other peoples lives but we get somethint out of it
Here are some of the greatest bullshits of mankind: altruism, free will, god.
haha, aren't you an optimist?... :P
I agree with you on the first two
What do you mean there’s no cost for me about picking up somebody’s pen?
I would have to bend down in order to grab it. Sounds like a cost to me.
Not any significant cost though. And even if it was a huge cost (let's say the person has major back issues or something that makes bending down very difficult), they're still only really doing it to feel that sense of self-satisfaction