Does altruism exist or is it just a word?

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I don't think that love is altruistic.

"I love..."

On it's face, it is pure egoism. Valuing, itself, is egoistic.

Because values are chosen by a volitional animal, loving not only constitutes choosing what to love, but choosing to love per se.

An animal is only following it's brightest star. It didn't pick the star, and it has no control over whether or not it follows.
 
I don't think that love is altruistic.

"I love..."

On it's face, it is pure egoism.

I think that the most meaningful kinds of love have aspects of selflessness. By that I mean, putting the needs and desires of others ahead of your own. That's not the same as altruism.
 
I don't think there's any contradiction between putting your love before you, and being selfish.

I think what would be selfless is treating your love as less important than yourself.
 
If making your love the thing you put first in your life, I don't understand the kind of tolerance for grotesque contradiction it would take to allow a person to call their actions selfless.
 
I don't think Time magazine is interested in being that logically consistent.

They sure as hell don't want anyone thinking that love is, by definition, selfish.
 
Not altruism. Animals aren't capable of it.

If humans are, it's one of the things that sets us apart from them.





:lecture

Interesting...sounds pretty but with nothing to back it up that's all it is, a pretty thought.

But maybe you arrived at it by doing experiments and/or conducting extensive studies of wild animals from various classes from around the globe and/or doing extensive research. Not sure. Why don't you just tell us how you arrived at this monumental conclusion?

A male black widow spider gives up it's life when it mates when it is eaten by it partner. It does it to provide her with food. What about a male hornbill? While the female is sealed inside of a tree for months with the chicks the male selflessly brings them food everyday for the entire time they are sealed inside. Female crocodiles bring there newborns to the water in their mouth and defend them for a week or two.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely true. :)


They also can't love or create.

Myself and many other people who own or have owned pets might strongly disagree with you that animals can't love. I, myself, own parrots and I believe they can feel love.

Animals can't create? What about the Great Barrier Reef, the largest structure built by any animal, including humans, in the world? Beavers create damns. What verb would you use to describe the act of an orb-web spider and it's beautiful web? Chimpanzees use sticks as tools for collecting termites to eat. What about the Satin Bowerbird and the beautiful blue objects with which it decorates it's nest. Did it create something? Guess not. Orangutans and gorillas and most other great apes build nests out of twigs and leaves to sleep in every night.

12713-satin_bowerbird-csw.jpg
 
Last edited:
Interesting...sounds pretty but with nothing to back it up that's all it is, a pretty thought.

But maybe you arrived at it by doing experiments and/or conducting extensive studies of wild animals from various classes from around the globe and/or doing extensive research. Not sure. Why don't you just tell us how you arrived this monumental conclusion?

A male black widow spider gives up it's life when it mates when it is eaten by it partner. It does it to provide her with food. What about a male hornbill? While the female is sealed inside of a tree for months with the chicks the male selflessly brings them food everyday for the entire time they are sealed inside. Female crocodiles bring there newborns to the water in their mouth and defend them for a week or two.

I don't think they give up their life willingly, some do escape, but they still don't live long afterwards.
 
I don't think there's any contradiction between putting your love before you, and being selfish.

I think what would be selfless is treating your love as less important than yourself.


Our views are not that different.

When you say that mistreating or neglecting your love would literally be a selfless act I understand. Hurting your love would be hurting your self – literally selfless. Caring for your love cares for your self.

I once saw Ayn Rand say that a man might even die for his wife if he believed life without her would be more awful than death itself. Thus, even in death he would be living with rational self-interest as his only moral compass. It would be no sacrifice, no show of altruism. I understand her point.

The problem I have with relegating love to “pure egoism” is that it makes it too easy to justify leaving your family if you fall ‘out of love’ with your mate.

Case in point:

I have an acquaintance; for our purposes, lets say his name is Bill. Bill is 32 and was married about twelve years ago. A few years later, Bill’s two nephews were orphaned. Bill and his wife decided to adopt these two boys. And not long after that they decided to adopt two more children; two girls. Meanwhile, Bill begins to fall out of love with his wife. He eventually even begins to have feelings of loathing towards her. After twelve years of marriage he walks out on his family. No effort was made to seek counseling. The wife had no idea there was even a problem. One day Bill just sat his family down and said he was leaving; that he already had an apartment rented. His children were screaming and holding on to his pants legs as he made his way out the door.

Not long after this Bill began dating 18-19 year olds. He claims he still loves his children but he only spends time with them 4 days a month.

I have not spoken to Bill since I learned that he was sleeping/living with a 19-year-old girl in his ‘bachelor pad’, but lets assume that he is very pleased with the current trajectory of his life. From a strictly evolutionary standpoint he has done nothing wrong. Those children weren’t ‘his’. He no longer loved his wife, and he can still give seed to fertile young women. As long as he is truly happy, he should be applauded for his rational self-interest. Perhaps later he can even find “true love”, a more pure egoism.


Well I’m sorry, I find this kind of behavior repugnant. And it happens all the time, probably every day. Maybe not this exact scenario with adopted children and so on, but both husbands/fathers, and wives/mothers leave their families to “follow their heart”. When married life isn’t the fairytale they thought it would be, people bail with very little thought given to how they might work things out.

The family is in a sad state, and I blame the self-first attitude for it. Even if you call it rational self-interest to imply a difference with run-of-the-mill selfishness, it still teaches people to be ass holes. :peace
 
I hope that some day, I get the time to go back and read this thread. Becuase the most recent posts are mind-blowingly far-fetched in relation to altruism and I am very, very curious to see how the discussion got to where it is.
 
Back
Top