Comments | synderon: Pure Altruism

synderon

Pure Altruism

Mar 19, 2007 19:53

I'm over halfway through Final Fantasy 7 now. It had been quite a while since I had played through it and I had only done so once. I find myself appreciating it a lot more this time around. The story is much more complex and satisfying than I remembered. It's not that I didn't like it before, but I had just thought of it as just another FF game ( Read more... )

Comments 27

mad_dog_bowers March 20 2007, 01:19:10 UTC

I actually have a lot of thoughts on both of these (im sure you aren't surprised to hear I have strong opinions about something) so I will be posting at length. Actually I am sure Ty will too because the question of Altruism for it's own sake actually came up between us as part of our discussion on free will. Anyway I don't have time for any of that now I just wanted to say: play Chrono Cross, especially if you have played Trigger. Not a very deep story, but a very good one nonetheless.

sargonepsilon March 20 2007, 02:27:14 UTC

As you can probably guess from my reaction to the last one, I don't believe in altruism. We get all sorts of chemical reinforcement for doing nice things, not to mention the social benefits.

Of course, if there is no free will, than there can't really be either altruism or selfishness.

I'll most likely be respectfully bowing out of the second topic when you post it, unless it's worded in such a way that an atheist view would be relevant.

triple_24 March 20 2007, 04:43:19 UTC

I'll have to say it does.

There are stories (I personally know a kid who has done this) over seas about troops who jump on gernades to contain the explosion from harming the troops...I dare someone to argue the selfishness in that.

hlangin March 20 2007, 05:33:23 UTC

I hate to do this to you Shaun...but I will argue that there very well can be selfishness in that. By sacrificing one's own life, that person will obtain glory and fame as well as an escape from fighting. I'm not saying that they were intentionally seeking but there is still a reward. One could go as far as saying they are rewarded by escaping the difficulties of life on Earth and are given the rewards of an afterlife. Now...whether or not they were searching for reward when they sacrificed their lives is not something that anyone can know, but there are ways to view it as "selfish."

hlangin March 20 2007, 05:35:06 UTC

That was not meant to insult the person that you know who did that either, I'm just saying that all altruistic or "selfless" acts are accompanied by a reward of some type. (now, whether the reward is worth the sacrifice is subject to opinion of course)

triple_24 March 20 2007, 17:19:53 UTC

Ok ok, I see your point. I had to think about this one for awhile, now as true as it is that there might be some hidden agenda behind sacrafice like that (which in that example we will never know) but after re-thinking this I've realized true alturism is only ruined by the person who precieves it. One jealous or cynical person can say "Oh he only did it to get the fame!" and just like that the selfless act of that one person has been tarnished forever.

I read a quote once "Beware of White Knights, they don't slay dragons. They tame them to suit their own dark purpose."

Now I'm willing to bet because of those 17 words a majority of the pople who have read it now believe there is no such thing as a good person.

At the end of the day, people don't admire a hero, they envy them.

because of things like the white knight quote and envy...
True alturism isnt existant.

(please understand I do know there are people out there who have ulterior motives...but not everyone is as evil as most think.)

Thread 7

zovick_84 March 20 2007, 15:46:11 UTC

Man...another big one. The distinction has to be made between altruistic behaviors and altruistic motivations. (I would assume people understand this, but I'm taking nothing for granted this time. :P) Certianly people can do things for no outward reward, we see it happen all the time, but as Erik said, they are often rewarded in some way (in his argument, a flood of chemicals producing some sort of positive emotional response). So while thier actions in the sense of the world may be altruistic, they always do it for thier own reasons. In psychology this is called psychological egoism, everyone acts completely out of thier own self intrest ( ... )

sargonepsilon March 20 2007, 18:38:48 UTC

Not to hurt your brain or anything, but if you think about it, being called to altruism by your deity make it impossible to be altruistic.

mad_dog_bowers March 22 2007, 02:20:33 UTC

Not if you frame it the way that the Bible does. It may seem to be a loophole to you, I don't want to argue the point here, I will only state the way that I have always thought about it and the way I have seen it repeated theologically. Jesus commands that we should have agape love and wish to be good to others for their sake. (Love your brother and all that) If we do things because we want approval from God (or our chemistry) it is wrong in my opinion. (Justification by works = BS) We should as Christians strive for the point where we wish to do these things because of a genuine concern for others. Still, since we are not consciously aware of our brains in most cases, I can see the argument made that you are simply convincing yourself that you are not benefiting from your kindness. I have not finished arranging my thoughts on this complicated subject, but I have never found a way to effectively argue to a skeptic that this sort of altruism is true from this standpoint. The fact is, the Bible claims that it is possible, therefore I ( ... )

sargonepsilon March 22 2007, 02:55:11 UTC

You are most certainly not an objectivist, my friend.

Thread 12

Issues to consider (preliminary considerations) silver_hand71 March 22 2007, 04:29:53 UTC

I have thought about this topic for a long time as well, and there have been plenty of good points brought up already, but there are a few things I would like to talk about in light of them that have been poking at my brain ( ... )

Re: Issues to consider (preliminary considerations) synderon March 22 2007, 05:17:04 UTC

It is not selfless. It is because you would feel guilty letting a man die or because you would just be happier having that person alive (even if you weren't around to enjoy that happiness.) As mentioned before, that doesn't make it an evil act by any means.

It's still a noble thing to risk your life for someone else but you aren't doing it only out of the caring for another's welfare. If all these ideas of good, nobility, and even emotion altogether didn't exist... we would still try to save the life of another for the benefit of society. It would be purely utilitarian but we would still do it.

Re: Issues to consider (preliminary considerations) hlangin March 22 2007, 06:07:18 UTC

It is up for debate as to whether Altruism is selflessness. But as far as what selflessness is...I think that both definitions apply to different people. When we speak of a selfless person in our society, it is someone who does something that does not benefit themselves. However, I feel like the second definition is the more accurate one...denying the existence or importance of your self ( ... )