From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat Aug 03 2002 - 13:02:30 MDT
Jef writes about the meaning of altruism
> I've been watching this discussion brewing for some time, and I see at least
> two factors bubbling to the surface.
> (1) The meaning of "altruism" depends on what level of context is being
> considered. At the level of social interaction, we can easily say that
> people exhibit altruistic behavior.
Yes, and here you are using the adjective to describe publicly
observable objective behavior---not quite the same thing as the
motivations or internal circuitry behind it (as you realize)
> At a more fundamental level, we are simply following our programming
> and responding to our environment, and there is no altruism.
I would suggest we adopt the view that we are *always* following
our programming. As physical objects, we obey the laws of physics
and dynamics as much as do other devices. Altruism may still exist.
All that would be required in one possible implementation in humans
would be for the value system of one individual A to be rewired so
that it was preferable to A that person X be saved any inconvenience
whatsoever even though it brought immediate suffering and a high
probability of death to A. I claim that to a less pronounced degree
exactly such altruism indeed exists in some humans.
> At an even more fundamental level, there is not even
> a "we" to be discussed.
I submit that you---or to pick a slightly more well-known figure---
President Bush, is an objective pattern. It's a huge class of
patterns, of course, all quite similar enough to be easily
recognized as an instance of President Bush. And of course a
relatively few borderline cases could not be so easily classified
as "President Bush" or "not President Bush", but that's the nature
of vast classes. (They form a continuous domain, incidentally.)
> (2) At the context level where we see people exhibit altruistic behavior,
> there are various motivations:
> a) a genetic predisposition to help others, rewarded by triggering of
> biological pleasure centers in the brain,
I think you mean "explanation", not "motivation". Well, the adherents
of the egotistic theory rightly point out that we probably all and
always get a tiny pinch of pleasure of some kind whenever our will
isn't thwarted and we succeed in the current task. From this they
jump to saying "that's *why* one did the action in question". But
I agree with your breakdown of the case here: "a genetic predisposition
to help others [regardless of anticipated reward to oneself]".
> b) unconscious psychological pressure based on feelings of "love",
> "obligation", "duty", "shame" "honor" and many others that result from
> training, social pressures, all tied in with the genetic predispositions
> above.
Well, okay, but I'm not sure that a distinction between (a) and (b)
will be fruitful.
> c) conscious behavior based on principles such as the "golden rule", the
> "categorical imperative", and religious and moral beliefs that the person
> chooses to follow. These principles and beliefs are all tied in with b and
> c above.
>
> Response to Lee's examples:
>
> I let people in traffic go before me, and then I take my turn.
> Motivations: c - I believe I am setting a good example for others to
> emulate and thereby contributing to the better world I want to live in. b -
> I would feel ashamed if I "selfishly" jumped ahead of others a - I do get a
> good feeling when I contribute.
Yes, but unlike the egoism adherents, I don't think that the "good
feeling" you refer to here necessarily occurs in all cases. And it
is different somehow from the internal "shame" you also speak of.
Yes, I know that we like to keep our homes tidy (well, some people
do at least), clean up messes, and seem to have a drive to impose
order. This can lie behind your wanting to make a better world.
This is the place where my thought experiment, if I may say so, is
quite valuable: imagine how you'd act if other people didn't have
thoughts and feelings. ("How to tell if you are a nice person", a
thread I began on June 21.) I would certainly stop being nice in
traffic (to the degree it was prudent, of course, to avoid road rage).
> Tipping
> c - I tip moderately when service is decent, higher when service is
> exceptional (when in cultures where tipping is the norm.) I do this whether
> I expect to visit restaurant again or not. I believe my feedback, further
> extending to a sincere "thank you" to the server or to the management
> contributes to building a better world. b - I would feel ashamed if I saw
> myself contributing less than others and being a "cheapskate". a - I get a
> small good feeling by contributing.
Well, the only way that I can think to analyze this is to ask whether
you would tip in strange city if you knew for a fact (somehow) that
it would not build a better world, and would not affect the behavior
of the long-term behavior of the waitress. The only result would be
that momentarily she was pleased, and that she became slightly richer.
Is the very fact that it makes her feel good a factor, so far as you
can tell?
> A stronger example would be giving one's life for others
> I haven't been in this position, but it would still follow the same pattern
> of motivations. [Suggested thought experiment for the reader.]
It's certain death to go into the reactor room on a submarine to repair
a critical component (inspired by a recent movie), but otherwise the American
ship will get away, and it's just very important to you that Japan win
the war. It's in the middle of the night, and no one will know if you
don't go in. In many cases soldiers and other people do things like this.
> Now, do I consider myself altruistic? I don't, because I clearly see my
> motivations for these actions, and they are all intended to serve me in some
> direct or indirect way.
I, on the other hand, am evidently an altruist (in part), because my
behavior would change were I to know that in some cases others wouldn't
benefit: for example, in the VR Solipsist case I would immediately
stop letting people out of crowded parking lots, and immediately stop
tipping in restaurants I was certain never to visit again, because for
one thing I don't believe it "makes my world a better place" to any
significant degree. (The money I retain in my pocket makes my world
a better place for me in a much more direct way!) For another, I would
stop doing those things because neither I nor anyone else would benefit
from them.
> If others mean something different by the word, then all I can
> say is "What is this altruism you speak of?"
It is evidently a hard-wired concern for others that plays a role,
however small, in our mostly self-interested calculations. A small
concern that cannot be traced to any form of self-interest. (Of
course, I omit the tautological and IMO silly point that indeed
my pleasure circuits are so constructed that, like you, I'll feel
cheap for not tipping or feel pleasure for anonymous charity. Well,
duh!, of course our brains are built that way.)
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:52 MST