The Pathological Altruist

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I know it isn’t saying that altruism itself is pathological. I have pretty good reading comprehension skills. Apparently though I’m not quite that skilled at writing. I need to look at that. If what I wrote appears to others that I understood the article to be saying that altruism is pathological then I should try another form of communication.

Oh well.

I got what it was saying. I just disagree with the use of altruism to describe the behaviors they allude to in the article. Pathological in some cases yes. But altruistic no.

Perhaps I am using a different definition for altruism than they are using in the article and that others who are reading it are using.

Let me try it this way. For altruistic behavior to be taken so far as to be considered pathological, initially it should actually be altruistic behavior. I just don't agree with that part.

No insult was intended. I read you as saying that you thought the article was stating that altruism is pathological. My error.

As far as the definition of altruism. How are you using the word? I would define it in the sense of any action that causes you to spend energy on behalf of someone else that may cost you beyond the mere energy expended. In other words, if I pay you to mow my lawn on a hot day you are not being altruistic. If you know I can't mow my lawn and you volunteer to do it even though it's a hot day then it is considered altruistic.

At this point you might say "but wait! Nurses are paid so anything they do cannot be altruistic" but that's not quite what I'm driving at. Nurses are paid to provide care. Good nurses go above and beyond the mere provision of care. They advocate in the interest of their patients as well as providing care. That energy expended could be used elsewhere--with other patients, on themselves, with their family--but they choose to give it to this patient. If it costs them--say the behavior is staying late while a particular patient is on the floor--then the action is altruistic.

I think that the Darwinian model of altruism--namely that altruism is any action entity A takes on behalf of entity B where the risk to entity A is non-zero and there is no immediate reciprocal benefit to be had by A--is certainly useful and has explanatory power. What part do you think is flawed?

Cheers
Aj