| | Michael,
The short analysis of Russell Roberts' observation is that when he said Altruism is "Benefiting others" - he left off "at the expense of the self." Altruism couldn't be said to be only of those things that are free - like sunshine or the air. It must include things that were acquired at a cost and to make them over to the benefit of others entails a sacrifice - unless it is a voluntary transaction that is entered into in hopes of a profit. If that is the case, Mr. Roberts would be saying that altruism includes selfishness. Nonsense.
--------------------------
Here is a longer analysis:
Look at these three cases:
1.) I see someone struggling to get something done that I'm good at, and I stop and give them a hand - I only loose a few minutes and almost enjoy myself enough to say I came out ahead - but it gets chocked up to kindness - a small piece of altruism?
2.) Someone was raised in a strictly religious family and believes that a failure to make personal sacrifice to those who have less is a sin. He forces himself to sacrifice things that harm his life in order to help others.
3.) The government takes money away from one group of people, against their will, to give it to those that have less - a purposeful, explicit act of altruism at the point of the gun.
I think that Rand would have said that item #1 was not an example of altruism since it wasn't done out a sense of duty and there was no intended sacrifice.
I think that the last two items would be categorized as altruism because they are both based upon the concept that the well being of others come ahead of one's own well-being and that is why sacrifice ends up being a required component. Altruism is benefiting others as more important than benefiting ones self - benefiting yourself is selfish which to be moral is egoism.
------------
"There are two moral questions which altruism lumps together into one “package-deal”: (1) What are values? (2) Who should be the beneficiary of values? Altruism substitutes the second for the first; it evades the task of defining a code of moral values, thus leaving man, in fact, without moral guidance.
Altruism declares that any action taken for the benefit of others is good, and any action taken for one’s own benefit is evil. Thus the beneficiary of an action is the only criterion of moral value—and so long as that beneficiary is anybody other than oneself, anything goes." Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness.
"If the sensation of eating a cake is a value, why is it an immoral indulgence in your stomach, but a moral goal for you to achieve in the stomach of others? Why is it immoral for you to desire, but moral for others to do so? Why is it immoral to produce a value and keep it, but moral to give it away? And if it is not moral for you to keep a value, why is it moral for others to accept it? If you are selfless and virtuous when you give it, are they not selfish and vicious when they take it? Does virtue consist of serving vice? Is the moral purpose of those who are good, self-immolation for the sake of those who are evil?" Ayn Rand, For the New Intellectual - Galt's Speech.
--------------
Here are some points on Altruism from a Wikipedia article: "Altruism ( /ˈæltruːɪzəm/) is the renunciation of the self, and a concern for the welfare of others."
...
"Altruism can be distinguished from feelings of loyalty and duty. Altruism is a motivation to provide a value to a party who must be anyone but the self..."
...
"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 the opposite of egoism."
...
"Altruism (also called the ethic of altruism, moralistic altruism, and ethical altruism) is an ethical doctrine that holds that individuals have a moral obligation to help, serve, or benefit others, if necessary at the sacrifice of self interest. Auguste Comte's version of altruism calls for living for the sake of others. One who holds to either of these ethics is known as an "altruist."
From another Wikipedia article:
"The word 'altruism' (French, altruisme, from autrui: "other people", derived from Latin alter: "other") was coined by Auguste Comte, the French founder of positivism, in order to describe the ethical doctrine he supported. He believed that individuals had a moral obligation to renounce self-interest and live for others."
------
August Compte coined the term "Altruism". He created a philosophy he called Social Positivism - he was the founder of Positivism. Here is a quote of his that shows the view opposite of Rand's - "Social positivism only accepts duties, for all and towards all. Its constant social viewpoint cannot include any notion of rights, for such notion always rests on individuality. We are born under a load of obligations of every kind, to our predecessors, to our successors, to our contemporaries. These obligations then increase or accumulate, for it is some time before we can return any service. … Any human right is therefore as absurd as immoral."
--------------
I doubt that anyone can find a political implementation of altruism that remained at all true to these core principles that didn't result in the government killing its own citizens in great numbers.
As to those Libertarians that want to believe that altruism can be benevolent and separate from sacrifice... my first thought is that they might be Christian... I'm sure that there are other reasons, but that is one that occurs to me.
(Edited by Steve Wolfer on 8/27, 1:21am)
|
|
