Would you give money to a homeless person if you knew he’d use it to buy drugs?
Would you give a gift to deceitful person if you bought the gift prior to this discovery?
Is the act of giving always with condition?
2007-02-15 10:32:49 · 10 answers · asked by LUCKY3 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Pure altruism is, in my opinion, impossible. The definition and roots of altruism suggest that its practice represents the highest moral calling.
When I respond to a "calling" it's out of some sense or recognition of its goodness or correctness. The avoidance of "badness" or "incorrectness" and the following of some inner moral drive is enough of a reward to render "pure altruism" an oxymoron.
All normal self-selected behavior is also self-serving (unless you're a mindless zombie).
And that's a good thing.
2007-02-15 11:10:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think that the act of giving is definitely always with conditions. Even if you are giving someone a gift for no particular occassion, you still get some sort of satiated or pleased feeling after doing so, and many people use generosity as a way to feel good about themselves. I do not believe true altruism exists, because we are just naturally selfish.
2007-02-15 10:37:41 · answer #2 · answered by pinkbeagle 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Let's just say that I've yet to meet an example of pure altruism. That doesn't mean it hasn't, or won't at some point, exist. If I were a gambling man I'd say I'm on pretty safe ground betting against the house on this one. Humans regularly cease to amaze me.
This reminds me of a Q I asked once: Why does the word "perfect" exist?
2007-02-15 13:02:53 · answer #3 · answered by Diesel Weasel 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Even when you don't physically get anything in return, you feel good about doing something good for someone, or at least you recognize your own altruistic qualities. The only real gift that can be given is one that you somehow do not know you gave and that the person receiving it does not know the identity of the giver.
2007-02-15 10:40:52 · answer #4 · answered by Thirdeye 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Pure altruism exists but not in the circumstances you mention.
I for example support Amnesty International and hope rather than know that my contributions will be utilised to help those who are imprisoned by repressive or usurping governments only becouse of conscientious opposition and not to assist criminals who may or may not be also imprisoned by those repressive or usurping governments.
2007-02-15 10:44:15 · answer #5 · answered by Freddy F 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No and if worry about stuff like this, you wouldn't make a very good samaritan. The good is not about the giving with reservations, it is about giving without reservations that makes a samaritan that type of person. Be yourself and in the long run you will benefit by it. May fortune smile upon you always.
2007-02-15 10:39:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think altruistic acts are usually self-serving for the altruist.
No
Yes ( in an effort to deceive )
99.9% of the time
2007-02-15 10:38:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No,
because people seem to have a karmic attitude about things,
they think,
If I do this, then maybe I will be paid back in return one day.
2007-02-15 10:40:19 · answer #8 · answered by accebere 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe.
Maybe.
No.
2007-02-15 10:37:34 · answer #9 · answered by eagleperch 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, yes, depends.
2007-02-15 10:46:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋