Home  ›  What Are Its Benefits of Modernism to Art? Does It Have Any Limitations? What Are They?

What Are Its Benefits of Modernism to Art? Does It Have Any Limitations? What Are They?

Written By Wednesday, 27 April 2022 Add Comment Edit

"Otherism" redirects here. For the philosophical concept, see Other (philosophy).

Principle or practice of concern for the welfare of others

Giving alms to the poor is often considered an donating action.

Altruism is the principle and moral practice of concern for happiness of other man beings or other animals, resulting in a quality of life both textile and spiritual. It is a traditional virtue in many cultures and a core attribute of various religious and secular worldviews. However, the object(due south) of business organisation vary among cultures and religions. In an farthermost case, altruism may become a synonym of selflessness, which is the reverse of selfishness.

The discussion "altruism" was popularized (and possibly coined) by the French philosopher Auguste Comte in French, as altruisme, for an antonym of egoism.[ane] [ii] He derived it from the Italian altrui, which in turn was derived from Latin alteri, significant "other people" or "somebody else".[3]

Altruism in biological observations in field populations of the day organisms is an individual performing an action which is at a cost to themselves (e.g., pleasure and quality of life, time, probability of survival or reproduction), simply benefits, either directly or indirectly, some other individual, without the expectation of reciprocity or compensation for that action. Steinberg suggests a definition for altruism in the clinical setting, that is "intentional and voluntary actions that aim to enhance the welfare of another person in the absence of whatever quid pro quo external rewards".[4] In one sense, the opposite of altruism is spite; a spiteful action harms another with no self-do good.

Altruism can exist distinguished from feelings of loyalty or concern for the mutual good. The latter are predicated upon social relationships, whilst altruism does non consider relationships. Much debate exists as to whether "true" altruism is possible in human psychology. The theory of psychological egoism suggests that no act of sharing, helping or sacrificing can exist described as truly altruistic, every bit the actor may receive an intrinsic advantage in the form of personal gratification. The validity of this statement depends on whether intrinsic rewards qualify every bit "benefits".

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 usually contrasted with egoism, which claims individuals are morally obligated to serve themselves first. Effective altruism is the apply of evidence and reason to determine the most effective ways to benefit others.

The notion of altruism [edit]

The concept has a long history in philosophical and ethical thought. The term was originally coined in the 19th century by the founding sociologist and philosopher of science, Auguste Comte, and has become a major topic for psychologists (especially evolutionary psychology researchers), evolutionary biologists, and ethologists. Whilst ideas about altruism from ane field tin can affect the other fields, the unlike methods and focuses of these fields always lead to different perspectives on altruism. In simple terms, altruism is caring about the welfare of other people and acting to aid them.

Scientific viewpoints [edit]

Anthropology [edit]

Marcel Mauss'southward essay The Souvenir contains a passage called "Note on alms". This annotation describes the development of the notion of alms (and by extension of altruism) from the notion of sacrifice. In it, he writes:

Alms are the fruits of a moral notion of the gift and of fortune on the one hand, and of a notion of sacrifice, on the other. Generosity is an obligation, because Nemesis avenges the poor and the gods for the superabundance of happiness and wealth of certain people who should rid themselves of it. This is the ancient morality of the gift, which has become a principle of justice. The gods and the spirits have that the share of wealth and happiness that has been offered to them and had been hitherto destroyed in useless sacrifices should serve the poor and children.

Evolutionary explanations [edit]

Giving alms to beggar children

In the scientific discipline of ethology (the study of beast behaviour), and more by and large in the report of social development, altruism refers to behaviour by an individual that increases the fitness of some other private while decreasing the fitness of the actor.[5] In evolutionary psychology this may be practical to a wide range of human behaviors such as clemency, emergency aid, aid to coalition partners, tipping, courtship gifts, production of public appurtenances, and environmentalism.[6]

Theories of plainly donating behavior were accelerated past the need to produce theories compatible with evolutionary origins. Two related strands of inquiry on altruism accept emerged from traditional evolutionary analyses and from evolutionary game theory a mathematical model and analysis of behavioural strategies.

Some of the proposed mechanisms are:

  • Kin selection.[7] That animals and humans are more donating towards close kin than to distant kin and non-kin has been confirmed in numerous studies across many dissimilar cultures. Even subtle cues indicating kinship may unconsciously increment altruistic behavior. Ane kinship cue is facial resemblance. One study found that slightly altering photographs and then that they more than closely resembled the faces of study participants increased the trust the participants expressed regarding depicted persons. Another cue is having the same family name, specially if rare, and this has been found to increment helpful behavior. Another study found more cooperative behavior the greater the number of perceived kin in a group. Using kinship terms in political speeches increased audience understanding with the speaker in i study. This issue was especially strong for firstborns, who are typically close to their families.[6]
  • Vested interests. People are probable to suffer if their friends, allies, and similar social ingroups suffer or fifty-fifty disappear. Helping such group members may therefore eventually benefit the altruist. Making ingroup membership more noticeable increases cooperativeness. Farthermost self-sacrifice towards the ingroup may be adaptive if a hostile outgroup threatens to kill the entire ingroup.[6]
  • Reciprocal altruism.[viii] Run into also Reciprocity (evolution).
    • Directly reciprocity.[ix] Inquiry shows that it tin can be beneficial to assist others if there is a chance that they can and volition reciprocate the assistance. The effective tit for tat strategy is one game theoretic example. Many people seem to exist following a similar strategy by cooperating if and only if others cooperate in render.[6]
      One consequence is that people are more cooperative if it is more likely that individuals will interact again in the time to come. People tend to exist less cooperative if they perceive that the frequency of helpers in the population is lower. They tend to help less if they see non-cooperativeness by others and this effect tend to exist stronger than the contrary effect of seeing cooperative behaviors. Merely changing the cooperative framing of a proposal may increase cooperativeness such equally calling it a "Community Game" instead of a "Wall Street Game".[half dozen]
      A trend towards reciprocity implies that people volition feel obligated to respond if someone helps them. This has been used by charities that give pocket-sized gifts to potential donors hoping thereby to induce reciprocity. Another method is to announce publicly that someone has given a large donation. The tendency to reciprocate can even generalize so people go more helpful toward others in full general subsequently beingness helped. On the other hand, people will avert or even retaliate against those perceived not to be cooperating. People sometimes mistakenly fail to assist when they intended to, or their helping may not be noticed, which may cause unintended conflicts. As such, information technology may be an optimal strategy to be slightly forgiving of and have a slightly generous estimation of non-cooperation.[vi]
      People are more likely to cooperate on a chore if they can communicate with one another showtime. This may be due to amend assessments of cooperativeness or due to exchange of promises. They are more than cooperative if they can gradually build trust, instead of being asked to give extensive help immediately. Direct reciprocity and cooperation in a grouping tin can be increased by changing the focus and incentives from intra-group competition to larger calibration competitions such equally between groups or against the full general population. Thus, giving grades and promotions based only on an individual's performance relative to a pocket-size local group, equally is common, may reduce cooperative behaviors in the group.[6]
    • Indirect reciprocity.[ten] The abstention of poor reciprocators and cheaters causes a person's reputation to become very important. A person with a practiced reputation for reciprocity has a higher adventure of receiving help even from persons they have had no directly interactions with previously.[six]
    • Strong reciprocity.[11] A form of reciprocity where some individuals seem to spend more resources on cooperating and punishing than would be most benign as predicted past several established theories of altruism. A number of theories have been proposed equally explanations as well as criticisms regarding its existence.
    • Pseudo-reciprocity.[12] An organism behaves altruistically and the recipient does not reciprocate but has an increased take a chance of acting in a way that is selfish simply as well as a byproduct benefits the altruist.
  • Costly signaling and the handicap principle.[13] Since altruism takes away resource from the altruist it tin exist an "honest signal" of resources availability and the abilities needed to gather resources. This may signal to others that the altruist is a valuable potential partner. It may too exist a betoken of interactive and cooperative intentions since those not interacting farther in the futurity proceeds nothing from the plush signaling. It is unclear if costly signaling tin can betoken a long-term cooperative personality but people have increased trust for those who help. Plush signaling is pointless if everyone has the same traits, resource, and cooperative intentions but become a potentially more than of import indicate if the population increasingly varies on these characteristics.[half-dozen]
Hunters widely sharing the meat has been seen as a costly point of power and research has constitute that good hunters have higher reproductive success and more adulterous relations even if they themselves receive no more of the hunted meat than anyone else. Similarly, holding large feasts and giving large donations has been seen as ways of demonstrating one'southward resources. Heroic hazard-taking has also been interpreted as a plush signal of ability.[6]

Volunteers assist Hurricane victims at the Houston Astrodome, following Hurricane Katrina.

Both indirect reciprocity and costly signaling depend on the value of reputation and tend to make similar predictions. One is that people will be more helping when they know that their helping behavior will exist communicated to people they will collaborate with afterwards, is publicly announced, is discussed, or is simply beingness observed by someone else. This take been documented in many studies. The effect is sensitive to subtle cues such as people being more than helpful when there were stylized eyespots instead of a logo on a figurer screen. Weak reputational cues such equally eyespots may become unimportant if there are stronger cues present and may lose their effect with continued exposure unless reinforced with real reputational furnishings.[six] Public displays such as public weeping for dead celebrities and participation in demonstrations may exist influenced past a want to exist seen as altruistic. People who know that they are publicly monitored sometimes even wastefully donate money they know are non needed past recipient which may be because of reputational concerns.[14]
Women have been found to find altruistic men to be attractive partners. When looking for a long-term partner, altruism may be a preferred trait as it may betoken that he is as well willing to share resource with her and her children. It has been shown that men perform donating acts in the early stages of a romantic relationship or simply when in the presence of an bonny woman. While both sexes state that kindness is the most preferable trait in a partner there is some bear witness that men place less value on this than women and that women may not be more altruistic in presence of an attractive man. Men may even avoid altruistic women in brusque-term relationships which may be because they look less success.[six] [14]
People may compete for social do good from a burnished reputation, which may crusade competitive altruism. On the other hand, in some experiments a proportion of people practice non seem to care about reputation and they do not aid more than even if this is conspicuous. This may possibly be due to reasons such as psychopathy or that they are so bonny that they need not be seen to be donating. The reputational benefits of altruism occur in the future every bit compared to the immediate costs of altruism in the nowadays. While humans and other organisms generally identify less value on futurity costs/benefits as compared to those in the nowadays, some have shorter time horizons than others and these people tend to be less cooperative.[half dozen]
Explicit extrinsic rewards and punishments have been institute to sometimes really have the reverse effect on behaviors compared to intrinsic rewards. This may be considering such extrinsic, height-downward incentives may supercede (partially or in whole) intrinsic and reputational incentives, motivating the person to focus on obtaining the extrinsic rewards, which overall may make the behaviors less desirable. Another effect is that people would like altruism to be due to a personality feature rather than due to overt reputational concerns and simply pointing out that there are reputational benefits of an activeness may actually reduce them. This may possibly be used as derogatory tactic against altruists, particularly by those who are not-cooperators. A counterargument is that doing good due to reputational concerns is ameliorate than doing no good at all.[6]
  • Group selection. It has controversially been argued by some evolutionary scientists such as David Sloan Wilson that natural selection tin act at the level of non-kin groups to produce adaptations that benefit a not-kin group even if these adaptations are detrimental at the individual level. Thus, while altruistic persons may under some circumstances exist outcompeted past less donating persons at the private level, according to group selection theory the opposite may occur at the group level where groups consisting of the more than altruistic persons may outcompete groups consisting of the less altruistic persons. Such altruism may only extend to ingroup members while in that location may instead prejudice and animosity against outgroup members (Come across also in-group favoritism). Grouping selection theory has been criticized by many other evolutionary scientists.[fifteen] [16]

Such explanations exercise not imply that humans are always consciously computing how to increase their inclusive fettle when they are doing altruistic acts. Instead, evolution has shaped psychological mechanisms, such as emotions, that promote altruistic behaviors.[6]

Every single instance of altruistic behavior need not always increment inclusive fitness; altruistic behaviors would have been selected for if such behaviors on boilerplate increased inclusive fitness in the ancestral environment. This need not imply that on boilerplate 50% or more of altruistic acts were benign for the altruist in the bequeathed surroundings; if the benefits from helping the right person were very high information technology would be beneficial to err on the side of circumspection and usually exist altruistic even if in most cases there were no benefits.[vi]

The benefits for the altruist may be increased and the costs reduced by being more than altruistic towards sure groups. Enquiry has constitute that people are more donating to kin than to no-kin, to friends than to strangers, to those attractive than to those unattractive, to not-competitors than to competitors, and to members ingroups than to members of outgroup.[6]

The study of altruism was the initial impetus behind George R. Price's development of the Price equation, which is a mathematical equation used to report genetic development. An interesting example of altruism is constitute in the cellular slime moulds, such as Dictyostelium mucoroides. These protists alive as individual amoebae until starved, at which indicate they amass and form a multicellular fruiting body in which some cells sacrifice themselves to promote the survival of other cells in the fruiting torso.

Selective investment theory proposes that close social bonds, and associated emotional, cognitive, and neurohormonal mechanisms, evolved in gild to facilitate long-term, high-cost altruism between those closely depending on ane another for survival and reproductive success.[17]

Such cooperative behaviors take sometimes been seen equally arguments for left-wing politics such by the Russian zoologist and anarchist Peter Kropotkin in his 1902 book Mutual Aid: A Factor of Development and Moral Philosopher Peter Vocalizer in his volume A Darwinian Left.

Neurobiology [edit]

Jorge Moll and Hashemite kingdom of jordan Grafman, neuroscientists at the National Institutes of Wellness and LABS-D'Or Hospital Network (J.1000.) provided the commencement show for the neural bases of altruistic giving in normal healthy volunteers, using functional magnetic resonance imaging. In their research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA in Oct 2006,[18] they showed that both pure monetary rewards and charitable donations activated the mesolimbic reward pathway, a primitive part of the brain that usually responds to food and sexual practice. However, when volunteers generously placed the interests of others earlier their own by making charitable donations, another brain excursion was selectively activated: the subgenual cortex/septal region. These structures are intimately related to social attachment and bonding in other species. Altruism, the experiment suggested, was non a superior moral faculty that suppresses basic selfish urges but rather was basic to the encephalon, difficult-wired and pleasurable.[nineteen] One brain region, the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex/basal forebrain, contributes to learning altruistic behavior, specially in those with trait empathy.[20] The aforementioned study has shown a connection betwixt giving to charity and the promotion of social bonding.[21]

In fact, in an experiment published in March 2007 at the Academy of Southern California neuroscientist Antonio R. Damasio and his colleagues showed that subjects with damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex lack the ability to empathically experience their way to moral answers, and that when confronted with moral dilemmas, these brain-damaged patients coldly came upward with "finish-justifies-the-ways" answers, leading Damasio to conclude that the signal was not that they reached immoral conclusions, but that when they were confronted by a difficult result – in this case as whether to shoot down a passenger aeroplane hijacked by terrorists before information technology hits a major city – these patients appear to reach decisions without the ache that afflicts those with commonly functioning brains. According to Adrian Raine, a clinical neuroscientist also at the University of Southern California, one of this written report'southward implications is that society may have to rethink how it judges immoral people: "Psychopaths oft feel no empathy or remorse. Without that sensation, people relying exclusively on reasoning seem to observe it harder to sort their way through moral thickets. Does that mean they should exist held to dissimilar standards of accountability?"[19]

In another study, in the 1990s, Dr. Neb Harbaugh, a Academy of Oregon economist, ended people are motivated to give for reasons of personal prestige and in a similar fMRI scanner test in 2007 with his psychologist colleague Dr. Ulrich Mayr, reached the same conclusions of Jorge Moll and Hashemite kingdom of jordan Grafman nearly giving to clemency, although they were able to split up the study grouping into two groups: "egoists" and "altruists". One of their discoveries was that, though rarely, even some of the considered "egoists" sometimes gave more than than expected considering that would help others, leading to the decision that there are other factors in cause in charity, such every bit a person's surroundings and values.[21]

Psychology [edit]

The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences defines psychological altruism as "a motivational state with the goal of increasing another'south welfare". Psychological altruism is contrasted with psychological egoism, which refers to the motivation to increase one's own welfare.[22]

There has been some debate on whether or not humans are truly capable of psychological altruism.[23] Some definitions specify a self-sacrificial nature to altruism and a lack of external rewards for donating behaviors. Nevertheless, because altruism ultimately benefits the self in many cases, the selflessness of donating acts is brought to question. The social substitution theory postulates that altruism only exists when benefits to the self outweigh costs to the self.[25] Daniel Batson is a psychologist who examined this question and argues against the social substitution theory. He identified four major motives: to ultimately do good the self (egoism), to ultimately do good the other person (altruism), to benefit a grouping (collectivism), or to uphold a moral principle (principlism). Altruism that ultimately serves selfish gains is thus differentiated from selfless altruism, but the full general conclusion has been that empathy-induced altruism can be genuinely selfless.[26] The empathy-altruism hypothesis basically states that psychological altruism does be and is evoked by the empathic desire to help someone who is suffering. Feelings of empathic business organization are contrasted with feelings of personal distress, which compel people to reduce their ain unpleasant emotions and increase their own positive ones through helping someone in need. Empathy is thus non selfless, since altruism works either as the style to avoid those negative, unpleasant feelings and have positive, pleasant feelings triggered by others' demand for help, or as the mode to incentive the gain of social reward or through fear to avoid social penalty by helping. People with empathic business organisation assistance others in distress even when exposure to the situation could be hands avoided, whereas those defective in empathic concern avoid helping unless information technology is difficult or incommunicable to avoid exposure to another's suffering.[22] Helping behavior is seen in humans at near two years old, when a toddler is capable of understanding subtle emotional cues.[27]

In psychological inquiry on altruism, studies oft observe altruism as demonstrated through prosocial behaviors such as helping, comforting, sharing, cooperation, philanthropy, and customs service. Research has found that people are well-nigh likely to help if they recognize that a person is in demand and feel personal responsibility for reducing the person'due south distress. Research likewise suggests that the number of bystanders witnessing distress or suffering affects the likelihood of helping (the Eyewitness effect). Greater numbers of bystanders decrease individual feelings of responsibility.[22] [28] However, a witness with a high level of empathic concern is probable to assume personal responsibility entirely regardless of the number of bystanders.[22]

Many studies have observed the furnishings of volunteerism (as a course of altruism) on happiness and health and take consistently found a potent connection between volunteerism and current and future health and well-being.[29] [30] In a report of older adults, those who volunteered were higher on life satisfaction and volition to live, and lower in depression, anxiety, and somatization.[31] Volunteerism and helping behavior accept not only been shown to improve mental health, but physical wellness and longevity every bit well, attributable to the activity and social integration information technology encourages.[29] [32] [33] [34] One study examined the physical health of mothers who volunteered over a xxx-year period and constitute that 52% of those who did not belong to a volunteer organization experienced a major illness while only 36% of those who did volunteer experienced i.[35] A study on adults ages 55+ found that during the four-year study period, people who volunteered for 2 or more organizations had a 63% lower likelihood of dying. Afterwards decision-making for prior health status, it was determined that volunteerism deemed for a 44% reduction in bloodshed.[36] Merely beingness enlightened of kindness in oneself and others is also associated with greater well-being. A study that asked participants to count each act of kindness they performed for ane calendar week significantly enhanced their subjective happiness.[37] It is of import to note that, while research supports the idea that altruistic acts bring about happiness, information technology has too been establish to work in the reverse direction—that happier people are too kinder. The relationship betwixt altruistic behavior and happiness is bidirectional. Studies have found that generosity increases linearly from sad to happy affective states.[38]

Studies have too been careful to note that feeling over-taxed by the needs of others has conversely negative furnishings on wellness and happiness.[34] For example, 1 report on volunteerism institute that feeling overwhelmed by others' demands had an even stronger negative effect on mental health than helping had a positive 1 (although positive effects were still pregnant).[39] Additionally, while generous acts make people feel good virtually themselves, it is also of import for people to appreciate the kindness they receive from others. Studies suggest that gratitude goes hand-in-paw with kindness and is also very important for our well-being. A study on the human relationship happiness to diverse graphic symbol strengths showed that "a conscious focus on gratitude led to reductions in negative bear upon and increases in optimistic appraisals, positive affect, offering emotional support, sleep quality, and well-existence".[40]

Pathological altruism [edit]

Pathological altruism is when altruism is taken to an unhealthy extreme, and either harms the altruistic person, or well-intentioned actions cause more harm than skillful.

The term "pathological altruism" was popularised by the book Pathological Altruism.

Examples include depression and burnout seen in healthcare professionals, an unhealthy focus on others to the detriment of i's ain needs, hoarding of animals, and ineffective philanthropic and social programs that ultimately worsen the situations they are meant to aid.[41]

Sociology [edit]

"Sociologists take long been concerned with how to build the proficient society" ("Altruism, Morality, and Social Solidarity". American Sociological Association.[42]). The construction of our societies and how individuals come to exhibit charitable, philanthropic, and other pro-social, altruistic actions for the common good is a largely researched topic within the field. The American Sociology Association (ASA) acknowledges public folklore maxim, "The intrinsic scientific, policy, and public relevance of this field of investigation in helping to construct 'good societies' is unquestionable" ("Altruism, Morality, and Social Solidarity" ASA). This type of sociology seeks contributions that aid grassroots and theoretical understandings of what motivates altruism and how it is organized, and promotes an altruistic focus in society to benefit the world and people it studies. How altruism is framed, organized, carried out, and what motivates it at the group level is an area of focus that sociologists seek to investigate in order to contribute back to the groups it studies and "build the adept society". The motivation of altruism is too the focus of study; some publications link the occurrence of moral outrage to the punishment of perpetrators and bounty of victims.[43] Studies have shown that generosity in laboratory and in online experiments is contagious – people imitate observed generosity of others.[44] [45]

Religious viewpoints [edit]

Nigh, if not all, of the earth'southward religions promote altruism as a very of import moral value. Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, and Sikhism, etc., place item emphasis on donating morality.

Buddhism [edit]

Altruism figures prominently in Buddhism. Beloved and compassion are components of all forms of Buddhism, and are focused on all beings equally: love is the wish that all beings be happy, and compassion is the wish that all beings be free from suffering. "Many illnesses can be cured by the ane medicine of beloved and pity. These qualities are the ultimate source of homo happiness, and the need for them lies at the very core of our being" (Dalai Lama).[46]

Still, the notion of altruism is modified in such a world-view, since the conventionalities is that such a do promotes our own happiness: "The more we care for the happiness of others, the greater our own sense of well-being becomes" (Dalai Lama[46]).

In the context of larger upstanding discussions on moral action and judgment, Buddhism is characterized past the conventionalities that negative (unhappy) consequences of our actions derive non from punishment or correction based on moral judgment, just from the police force of karma, which functions similar a natural police force of crusade and event. A simple analogy of such crusade and issue is the instance of experiencing the effects of what one causes: if one causes suffering, and so as a natural consequence ane would feel suffering; if one causes happiness, and then as a natural consequence one would experience happiness.

Jainism [edit]

Sculpture depicting the Jain concept of ahimsa (not-injury)

The key principles of Jainism circumduct around the concept of altruism, non only for humans but for all sentient beings. Jainism preaches the view of Ahimsa – to live and let alive, thereby non harming sentient beings, i.e. uncompromising reverence for all life. It also considers all living things to be equal. The first Tirthankara, Rishabhdev, introduced the concept of altruism for all living beings, from extending knowledge and experience to others to donation, giving oneself upward for others, non-violence and compassion for all living things.

Jainism prescribes a path of not-violence to progress the soul to this ultimate goal. A major characteristic of Jain belief is the accent on the consequences of not only physical but also mental behaviors. One'due south unconquered mind with anger, pride (ego), deceit, greed and uncontrolled sense organs are the powerful enemies of humans. Anger spoils good relations, pride destroys humility, deceit destroys peace and greed destroys everything. Jainism recommends acquisition anger by forgiveness, pride by humility, deceit past straightforwardness and greed by delectation.

Jains believe that to attain enlightenment and ultimately liberation, 1 must practice the post-obit upstanding principles (major vows) in thought, oral communication and activeness. The degree to which these principles are proficient is different for householders and monks. They are:

  1. Non-violence (Ahimsa);
  2. Truthfulness (Satya);
  3. Non-stealing (Asteya);
  4. Celibacy (Brahmacharya);
  5. Non-possession or non-materialism (Aparigraha);

The "great vows" (Mahavrata) are prescribed for monks and "limited vows" (Anuvrata) are prescribed for householders. The house-holders are encouraged to practise the higher up-mentioned five vows. The monks have to observe them very strictly. With consequent do, it will be possible to overcome the limitations gradually, accelerating the spiritual progress.

The principle of nonviolence seeks to minimize karmas which limit the capabilities of the soul. Jainism views every soul as worthy of respect because it has the potential to become Siddha (God in Jainism). Because all living beings possess a soul, great care and awareness is essential in 1'due south deportment. Jainism emphasizes the equality of all life, advocating harmlessness towards all, whether the creatures are smashing or small. This policy extends fifty-fifty to microscopic organisms. Jainism acknowledges that every person has different capabilities and capacities to practise and therefore accepts different levels of compliance for ascetics and householders.

Christianity [edit]

St Thomas Aquinas interprets 'Y'all should love your neighbour as yourself'[47] as meaning that love for ourselves is the exemplar of honey for others.[48] Considering that "the dear with which a man loves himself is the form and root of friendship" and quotes Aristotle that "the origin of friendly relations with others lies in our relations to ourselves",[49] he concluded that though we are not spring to love others more than ourselves, we naturally seek the mutual good, the good of the whole, more than whatever private good, the good of a part. However, he thinks we should love God more than ourselves and our neighbours, and more than our actual life—since the ultimate purpose of loving our neighbour is to share in eternal beatitude: a more desirable matter than bodily well-being. In coining the give-and-take Altruism, equally stated above, Comte was probably opposing this Thomistic doctrine, which is present in some theological schools within Catholicism.

Many biblical authors draw a strong connection between love of others and dear of God. 1 John four states that for i to honey God one must love his fellowman, and that hatred of one'due south fellowman is the aforementioned as hatred of God. Thomas Jay Oord has argued in several books that altruism is merely 1 possible form of beloved. An altruistic action is not always a loving activity. Oord defines altruism every bit acting for the other's good, and he agrees with feminists who note that sometimes dearest requires acting for one'due south own good when the other's demands undermine overall well-beingness.

German philosopher Max Scheler distinguishes two means in which the stiff can assistance the weak. Ane way is a sincere expression of Christian honey, "motivated past a powerful feeling of security, strength, and inner conservancy, of the invincible fullness of one's own life and existence".[50] Another manner is merely "one of the many modern substitutes for love, ... null simply the urge to turn away from oneself and to lose oneself in other people'south business".[51] At its worst, Scheler says, "love for the small-scale, the poor, the weak, and the oppressed is actually disguised hatred, repressed envy, an impulse to backbite, etc., directed against the opposite phenomena: wealth, strength, power, largesse."[52]

Islam [edit]

In Islam, the concept "īthār" (إيثار) (altruism) is the notion of "preferring others to oneself". For Sufis, this means devotion to others through complete forgetfulness of one'due south own concerns, where concern for others is deemed as a demand made past Allah (i.e. God) on the human trunk, considered to be property of Allah alone. The importance of īthār lies in sacrifice for the sake of the greater good; Islam considers those practicing īthār as constant by the highest degree of nobility.[53] This is similar to the notion of knightly, simply unlike that European concept, in īthār attention is focused on everything in being. A abiding concern for Allah results in a conscientious attitude towards people, animals, and other things in this globe.[54]

Judaism [edit]

Judaism defines altruism every bit the desired goal of creation. The famous Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook stated that love is the most important attribute in humanity.[55] This is defined as bestowal, or giving, which is the intention of altruism. This tin can be altruism towards humanity that leads to altruism towards the creator or God. Kabbalah defines God as the strength of giving in existence. Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto in detail focused on the 'purpose of creation' and how the volition of God was to bring cosmos into perfection and adhesion with this upper force.[56]

Mod Kabbalah developed past Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag, in his writings about the time to come generation, focuses on how society could reach an altruistic social framework.[57] Ashlag proposed that such a framework is the purpose of creation, and everything that happens is to raise humanity to the level of altruism, love for one some other. Ashlag focused on society and its relation to divinity.[58]

Sikhism [edit]

Altruism is essential to the Sikh religion. The central faith in Sikhism is that the greatest act any one tin practise is to imbibe and alive the godly qualities like love, affection, sacrifice, patience, harmony, truthfulness. The concept of seva, or selfless service to the community for its own sake, is an of import concept in Sikhism.[59]

The fifth Guru, Arjun Dev, sacrificed his life to uphold "22 carats of pure truth, the greatest gift to humanity", the Guru Granth. The 9th Guru, Tegh Bahadur, sacrificed his head to protect weak and defenseless people against atrocity.

In the late seventeenth century, Guru Gobind Singh (the tenth Guru in Sikhism), was at war with the Mughal rulers to protect the people of dissimilar faiths when a fellow Sikh, Bhai Kanhaiya, attended the troops of the enemy.[lx] He gave h2o to both friends and foes who were wounded on the battlefield. Some of the enemy began to fight once again and some Sikh warriors were annoyed by Bhai Kanhaiya equally he was helping their enemy. Sikh soldiers brought Bhai Kanhaiya before Guru Gobind Singh, and complained of his action that they considered counterproductive to their struggle on the battlefield. "What were you doing, and why?" asked the Guru. "I was giving water to the wounded because I saw your face in all of them", replied Bhai Kanhaiya. The Guru responded, "Then you should besides give them ointment to heal their wounds. Yous were practicing what you were coached in the business firm of the Guru."

Under the tutelage of the Guru, Bhai Kanhaiya later founded a volunteer corps for altruism, which is nevertheless engaged today in doing skilful to others and in preparation new recruits for this service.[61]

Hinduism [edit]

In Hinduism Selflessness (Atmatyag), Love (Prema), Kindness (Daya) and Forgiveness (Kshama) are considered as the highest acts of humanity or "Manushyattva". Giving alms to the beggers or poor people is considered as a divine act or "Punya" and Hindus believe information technology will free their souls from guilt or "Paapa" and will led them to heaven or "Swarga" in afterlife. Altruism is also the primal human activity of various Hindu mythology and religious poems and songs.

The founder of warkari samprdaya the great saint "Dhnyaneshwar Maharaj" (1275-1296) in his "Pasaydan" pray to the supreme lord "Vitthal" for the wellbeing of all living organisms of the universe.

Swami Vivekananda, the legendary Hindu monk, has said -"Jive prem kare jeijon, Seijon sebiche Iswar" (Whoever loves any living being, is serving god.). Mass donation of clothes to poor people (Vastraseva), or blood donation army camp or mass food donation (Annaseva) for poor people is common in various Hindu religious ceremonies.

Swami Sivananda, an Advaita scholar, reiterates the views in his commentary synthesising Vedanta views on the Brahma Sutras, a Vedantic text. In his commentary on Chapter 3 of the Brahma Sutras, Sivananda notes that karma is insentient and short-lived, and ceases to be as soon as a act is executed. Hence, karma cannot bestow the fruits of actions at a hereafter date according to one's merit. Furthermore, one cannot contend that karma generates apurva or punya, which gives fruit. Since apurva is non-sentient, it cannot human activity unless moved by an intelligent being such every bit a god. It cannot independently bestow reward or punishment.

Notwithstanding the very well known and popular text, the Bhagavad Gita supports the doctrine of karma yoga (achieving oneness with God through activeness) & "Nishkam Karma" or action without expectation / want for personal proceeds which can be said to comprehend altruism. Altruistic acts are generally historic and very well received in Hindu literature and is key to Hindu morality.[62]

Philosophy [edit]

At that place exists a wide range of philosophical views on humans' obligations or motivations to deed altruistically. Proponents of ethical altruism maintain that individuals are morally obligated to act altruistically. The opposing view is upstanding egoism, which maintains that moral agents should ever human activity in their ain self-involvement. Both ethical altruism and upstanding egoism contrast with utilitarianism, which maintains that each agent should act in order to maximise the efficacy of their function and the benefit to both themselves and their co-inhabitants.

A related concept in descriptive ethics is psychological egoism, the thesis that humans always act in their ain self-involvement and that truthful altruism is impossible. Rational egoism is the view that rationality consists in interim in ane's self-interest (without specifying how this affects one's moral obligations).

Effective altruism [edit]

Effective altruism is a philosophy and social movement that uses evidence and reasoning to determine the nigh effective ways to benefit others.[63] Constructive altruism encourages individuals to consider all causes and actions and to act in the manner that brings well-nigh the greatest positive impact, based upon their values.[64] Information technology is the broad, testify-based and crusade-neutral approach that distinguishes constructive altruism from traditional altruism or charity.[65] Effective altruism is part of the larger movement towards prove-based practices.

While a substantial proportion of effective altruists take focused on the nonprofit sector, the philosophy of effective altruism applies more broadly to prioritizing the scientific projects, companies, and policy initiatives which can be estimated to save lives, help people, or otherwise accept the biggest do good.[66] People associated with the movement include philosopher Peter Singer,[67] Facebook co founder Dustin Moskovitz,[68] Cari Tuna,[69] Ben Delo,[70] Oxford-based researchers William MacAskill[71] and Toby Ord,[72] and professional person poker player Liv Boeree,[73] [74]

Genetics [edit]

The genes OXTR, CD38, COMT, DRD4, DRD5, IGF2, and GABRB2 have been found to be candidate genes for altruism.[75]

Digital Altruism [edit]

Digital Altruism is the notion that some are willing to freely share information based on the principle of reciprocity and in the belief that in the end, everyone benefits from sharing data via the Cyberspace.

This term is coined by Dr. Dana Klisanin, the founder and CEO of Evolutionary Guidance Media R&D Inc., and is a recipient of the Early Career Award for Scientific Achievement in Media Psychology from the American Psychological Association's Partition of Media Psychology.[76] [77]

According to Klisanin, "the notion that "some are willing to freely reveal what they know" is interesting.[78]

Types of Digital Altruism [edit]

In that location are three types of digital altruism: (ane) "everyday digital altruism," involving expedience, ease, moral engagement, and conformity; (2) "creative digital altruism," involving creativity, heightened moral engagement, and cooperation; and (3) "co-artistic digital altruism" involving creativity, moral engagement, and meta cooperative efforts.[78]

Run across as well [edit]

  • Altruria, California
  • Charitable organisation
  • Comedy of the commons
  • Consideration
  • Egotism
  • Family economic science
  • Aureate Rule
  • Factor-centered view of evolution
  • Humanity (virtue)
  • Misanthropy
  • Mutual assist
  • Non nobis solum
  • Prisoner's dilemma
  • Random act of kindness
  • Social preferences
  • Social psychology
  • Solidarity (sociology)
  • Spite (game theory)

Notes [edit]

  1. ^ "altruism (northward .)". Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper. Retrieved 27 May 2021.
  2. ^ Teske, Nathan (2009). Political Activists in America: The Identity Construction Model of Political Participation. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press. p. 101. ISBN9780271035468.
  3. ^ Ciciloni, Ferdinando (1825). A Grammar of the Italian Language. London: John Murray. p. 64.
  4. ^ Steinberg, David (2010). "Altruism in medicine: its definition, nature, and dilemmas". Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 19 (2): 249–57. doi:x.1017/s0963180109990521. PMID 20226108. S2CID 30534335.
  5. ^ Bong, Graham (2008). Selection: the mechanism of evolution . Oxford: Oxford Academy Printing. pp. 367–368. ISBN978-0-19-856972-5.
  6. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m due north o p q Pat Barcaly. The evolution of charitable behaviour and the power of reputation. In Roberts, S. C. (2011). Roberts, Due south. Craig (ed.). Applied Evolutionary Psychology. Oxford University Printing. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199586073.001.0001. ISBN9780199586073.
  7. ^ Okasha, Samir. "Biological Altruism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Retrieved 13 May 2011.
  8. ^ Trivers, R.L. (1971). "The evolution of reciprocal altruism". Quarterly Review of Biology. 46: 35–57. doi:10.1086/406755. S2CID 19027999.
  9. ^ R Axelrod and WD Hamilton (27 March 1981). "The evolution of cooperation". Scientific discipline. 211 (4489): 1390–1396. Bibcode:1981Sci...211.1390A. CiteSeerX10.1.ane.147.9644. doi:10.1126/scientific discipline.7466396. PMID 7466396.
  10. ^ Martin Nowak & Karl Sigmund (October 2005). "Evolution of indirect reciprocity". Nature. 437 (27): 1291–1298. Bibcode:2005Natur.437.1291N. doi:x.1038/nature04131. PMID 16251955. S2CID 3153895.
  11. ^ Gintis, Herbert (September 2000). "Strong Reciprocity and Homo Sociality". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 206 (2): 169–179. Bibcode:2000JThBi.206..169G. CiteSeerXten.1.1.335.7226. doi:10.1006/jtbi.2000.2111. hdl:10419/105717. PMID 10966755.
  12. ^ Genetic and Cultural Evolution of Cooperation, Affiliate 11. Berlin: Dahlem Workshop Reports. 2003. ISBN978-0-262-08326-iii.
  13. ^ Zahavi, A. (1995). "Altruism equally a handicap – The limitations of kin selection and reciprocity". Avian Biol. 26 (ane): 1–3. doi:10.2307/3677205. JSTOR 3677205.
  14. ^ a b Wendy Iredal and Mark van Vugt. Altruism as showing off: a signaling perspective on promoting green behaviour and acts of kindness. In Roberts, S. C. (2011). Roberts, S. Craig (ed.). Applied Evolutionary Psychology. Oxford University Printing. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199586073.001.0001. ISBN9780199586073.
  15. ^ Leon Neyfakh Where does good come up from?, 17 April 2011, http://world wide web.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2011/04/17/where_does_good_come_from/
  16. ^ "The Daily Fauna". The Daily Beast . Retrieved xvi September 2019.
  17. ^ Chocolate-brown, Due south.L.; Brown, R.M. (2006). "Selective investment theory: Recasting the functional significance of close relationships" (PDF). Psychological Research. 17: 1–29. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1701_01. S2CID 144718661. Archived from the original (PDF) on fourteen July 2014.
  18. ^ Human fronto–mesolimbic networks guide decisions nearly charitable donation, PNAS 2006:103(42);15623–15628
  19. ^ a b Vedantam, Shankar (May 2007). "If It Feels Skilful to Be Good, It Might Exist Only Natural". The Washington Postal service . Retrieved 23 April 2010.
  20. ^ Lockwood, Patricia L; Apps, Matthew A J; Valton, Vincent; Viding, Essi; Roiser, Jonathan P (2016). "Neurocomputational mechanisms of prosocial learning and links to empathy". Proceedings of the National University of Sciences of the United states. 113 (35): 9763–8. doi:ten.1073/pnas.1603198113. PMC5024617. PMID 27528669. . fMRI revealed that activity in a posterior portion of the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex/basal forebrain (sgACC) drives learning merely when we are acting in a prosocial context
    • Lay summary in: "Finding the Encephalon'southward Generosity Center". Neuroscience News. 15 August 2016.
  21. ^ a b Svoboda, Elizabeth (v September 2013). "Scientists Are Finding That We Are Difficult-Wired for Giving". University of Notre Dame. Retrieved 7 Baronial 2017.
  22. ^ a b c d Darity, Jr., William A., ed. (2008). "Altruism". International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). Detroit: Macmillan Reference Us. pp. 87–88.
  23. ^ [Batson, C. (2011). Altruism in humans. New York, NY US: Oxford University Printing.]
  24. ^ Maner, J. K.; Luce, C. L.; Neuberg, S. 50.; Cialdini, R. B.; Dark-brown, S.; Sagarin, B. J. (2002). "The furnishings of perspective taking on motivations for helping: Nonetheless no evidence for altruism". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 28 (11): 1601–1610. doi:10.1177/014616702237586. S2CID 146125891.
  25. ^ Batson, C. Daniel; Ahmad, Nadia; Stocks, Eastward. Fifty. (2011). "Four forms of prosocial motivation: Egoism, altruism, collectivism, and principlism". In Dunning, David (ed.). Social motivation. New York, NY: Psychology Press. pp. 103–126. ISBN9781136847202.
  26. ^ Svetlova, M.; Nichols, Southward. R.; Brownell, C. A. (2010). "Toddlers prosocial behavior: From instrumental to empathic to donating helping". Child Development. 81 (6): 1814–1827. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01512.10. PMC3088085. PMID 21077866.
  27. ^ Hudson, James M.; Bruckman, Amy S. (2004). "The Bystander Effect: A Lens for Understanding Patterns of Participation". Periodical of the Learning Sciences. 13 (2): 165–195. CiteSeerX10.1.1.72.4881. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1302_2. S2CID 16442298.
  28. ^ a b Musick, M. A.; Wilson, J. (2003). "Volunteering and low: The role of psychological and social resource in different age groups". Social Science & Medicine. 56 (2): 259–269. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00025-4. PMID 12473312.
  29. ^ Koenig, L. B.; McGue, G.; Krueger, R. F.; Bouchard (2007). "Religiousness, antisocial behavior, and altruism: Genetic and environmental arbitration". Journal of Personality. 75 (2): 265–290. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00439.x. PMID 17359239.
  30. ^ Hunter, K. I.; Hunter, M. Westward. (1980). "Psychosocial differences between elderly volunteers and not-volunteers". The International Journal of Crumbling & Human being Evolution. 12 (three): 205–213. doi:x.2190/0H6V-QPPP-7JK4-LR38. PMID 7216525. S2CID 42991434.
  31. ^ Kayloe, J. C.; Krause, Yard. (1985). "RARE FIND: or The value of volunteerism". Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal. viii (4): 49–56. doi:x.1037/h0099659.
  32. ^ Brownish, S. L.; Brown, R.; Business firm, J. S.; Smith, D. Thousand. (2008). "Coping with spousal loss: Potential buffering furnishings of self-reported helping behavior". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 34 (6): 849–861. doi:10.1177/0146167208314972. PMID 18344495. S2CID 42983453.
  33. ^ a b Mail service, S. G. (2005). "Altruism, Happiness, and Health: It's Good to Be Good". International Periodical of Behavioral Medicine. 12 (2): 66–77. CiteSeerX10.one.1.485.8406. doi:10.1207/s15327558ijbm1202_4. PMID 15901215. S2CID 12544814.
  34. ^ Moen, P.; Dempster-Mcclain, D.; Williams, R. Chiliad. (1992). "Successful aging: A life-course perspective on women's multiple roles and health". American Journal of Sociology. 97 (six): 1612–1638. doi:10.1086/229941. S2CID 4828775.
  35. ^ Oman, D.; Thoresen, C. E.; McMahon, K. (1999). "Volunteerism and mortality amid the community-dwelling elderly". Journal of Health Psychology. 4 (iii): 301–316. doi:10.1177/135910539900400301. PMID 22021599.
  36. ^ Otake, K.; Shimai, Due south.; Tanaka-Matsumi, J.; Otsui, Thousand.; Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). "Happy people become happier through kindness: A counting kindnesses intervention". Journal of Happiness Studies. 7 (3): 361–375. doi:10.1007/s10902-005-3650-z. PMC1820947. PMID 17356687.
  37. ^ Underwood, B.; Froming, W. J.; Moore, B. S. (1977). "Mood, attention, and altruism: A search for mediating variables". Developmental Psychology. 13 (5): 541–542. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.13.5.541.
  38. ^ Schwartz, C.; Meisenhelder, J.; Ma, Y.; Reed, G. (2003). "Altruistic Social Interest Behaviors Are Associated With Better Mental Health". Psychosomatic Medicine. 65 (five): 778–785. CiteSeerXx.1.ane.529.7780. doi:10.1097/01.PSY.0000079378.39062.D4. PMID 14508020. S2CID 20644442.
  39. ^ Shimai, S.; Otake, K.; Park, N.; Peterson, C.; Seligman, M. P. (2006). "Convergence of graphic symbol strengths in American and Japanese young adults". Journal of Happiness Studies. seven (3): 311–322. doi:10.1007/s10902-005-3647-seven. S2CID 143964762.
  40. ^ Pathological Altruism. Oxford Academy Press. 19 Dec 2011. ISBN9780199738571.
  41. ^ "American Sociological Clan: Altruism, Morality and Social Solidarity". Archived from the original on iii May 2012.
  42. ^ Thulin EW, Bicchieri C. I'm then angry I could help you: Moral outrage equally a commuter of victim bounty. Social Philosophy & Policy, 2016, 32: 146–160
  43. ^ Tsvetkova, Milena; Macy, Michael (2015). "The Contagion of Prosocial Behavior and the Emergence of Voluntary-Contribution Communities". Social Phenomena: From Information Analysis to Models. Springer International Publishing: 117–134. doi:10.1007/978-three-319-14011-7_7. ISBN978-3-319-14010-0.
  44. ^ Tagiew, Rustam; Ignatov, Dmitry (2016). "Souvenir Ratios in Laboratory Experiments" (PDF). CEUR Workshop Proceedings. 1627: 82–93.
  45. ^ a b Spoken communication past the Dalai Lama Archived 3 Oct 2009 at the Wayback Automobile
    The phrase "cadre of our beingness" is Freudian; come across Bettina Bock von Wülfingen (2013). "Freud's 'Core of our Being' Between Cytology and Psychoanalysis". Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte. 36 (three): 226–244. doi:ten.1002/bewi.201301604. PMID 32545937.
  46. ^ Leviticus 19 and Matthew 22
  47. ^ Summa Theologica, II:Two Quaestio 25, Article iv
  48. ^ Nicomachean Ethics IX.4 1166a1
  49. ^ Scheler, Max (1961). Ressentiment. pp. 88–89.
  50. ^ Scheler, Max (1961). Ressentiment. pp. 95–96.
  51. ^ Scheler, Max (1961). Ressentiment. pp. 96–97.
  52. ^ G (2004). Key Concepts in the Do of Sufism: Emerald Hills of the Heart. Rutherford, Northward.J.: Fountain. pp. 10–eleven. ISBN978-1-932099-75-i.
  53. ^ Neusner, Jacob Eds (2005). Altruism in World Religions. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown Univ. Press. pp. 79–80. ISBN978-ane-58901-065-9.
  54. ^ Kook, Abraham Isaac; Ben Zion Bokser (1978). Abraham Isaac Kook: The lights of penitence, The moral principles, Lights of holiness, essays, letters, and poems . Paulist Printing. pp. 135–136. ISBN978-0-8091-2159-5.
  55. ^ Luzzatto, Moshe Ḥayyim (1997). The way of God. Feldheim Publishers. pp. 37–38. ISBN978-0-87306-769-0.
  56. ^ Ashlag, Yehuda (2006). Building the Future Lodge. Thornhill, Canada: Laitman Kabbalah Publishers. pp. 120–130. ISBN978-965-7065-34-1.
  57. ^ Ashlag, Yehuda (2006). Building the Future Social club. Thornhill, Canada: Laitman Kabbalah Publishers. pp. 175–180. ISBN978-965-7065-34-ane.
  58. ^ Cole, W. Owen; Sambhi, Piara Singh (1990). A Pop Dictionary of Sikhism. Curzon Press. pp. 38–39, 84. Retrieved ii December 2018.
  59. ^ Joseph Davey Cunningham (1918). "A History of the Sikhs". Oxford University Printing. p. ix. Retrieved xxx November 2018.
  60. ^ O. P. Ralhan (1997). The cracking gurus of the Sikhs. New Delhi: Anmol Publications Pvt Ltd. p. 253. ISBN978-81-7488-479-4.
  61. ^ Sivananda, Swami. Phaladhikaranam, Topic 8, Sutras 38–41.
  62. ^ MacAskill, William (31 January 2017). "Effective Altruism: Introduction". Essays in Philosophy. 18 (1): ii. doi:10.7710/1526-0569.1580. ISSN 1526-0569.
  63. ^ Matthews, Dylan (24 April 2015). "You have $8 billion. You want to do as much skilful as possible. What practise you do?". Vox . Retrieved 27 April 2015.
  64. ^ Bennett, Nicole; Carter, Ashley; Resney, Romney; Woods, Wendy. "How Tech Entrepreneurs Are Disrupting Philanthropy". BCG Perspectives. Boston Consulting Group. Retrieved eleven March 2017.
  65. ^ MacAskill, William (2015). Doing Proficient Improve. Avery. ISBN978-1592409105.
  66. ^ Walters, Helen (19 September 2013). "The why and how of effective altruism: Peter Singer'due south talk visualized". TED Weblog.
  67. ^ "Cari Tuna and Dustin Moskovitz: Immature Silicon Valley billionaires pioneer new approach to philanthropy". The Washington Post. 26 December 2014.
  68. ^ Callahan, Favid (12 September 2013). "Run across Cari Tuna, the Woman Giving Away Dustin Moskovitz'southward Facebook Fortune". Inside Philanthropy . Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  69. ^ Piper, Kelsey (29 May 2019). "Uk'south youngest cocky-fabricated billionaire is giving away his fortune – to people who don't exist yet". Vox . Retrieved nine June 2019.
  70. ^ Thompson, Derek (15 June 2015). "The Greatest Good". The Atlantic.
  71. ^ "Peter Vocalist: "The Nearly Adept Y'all Can Do" | Talks at Google". YouTube.
  72. ^ "News: Liv Boeree on Effective Altruism". www.pokerstrategy.com . Retrieved eleven April 2017.
  73. ^ "Effective Altruism | Liv Boeree". www.livboeree.com. Archived from the original on 11 April 2017. Retrieved eleven April 2017.
  74. ^ Thompson, GJ; Hurd, PL; Crespi, BJ (2013). "Genes underlying altruism". Biol Lett. 9 (6): 20130395. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2013.0395. PMC3871336. PMID 24132092.
  75. ^ Congratulations to the psychologists who received awards at APA'due south 2012 Annual Convention terminal month
  76. ^ "Using engineering science to promote human flourishing". Dana KLISANIN.
  77. ^ a b Klisanin, Dana (2011). "Microsoft Word - Document1" (PDF). Media Psychology Review. three, Lawrence Erlbaum Assembly Publishers: 1–11.

References [edit]

  • Oord, Thomas (2007). The Altruism Reader. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press. ISBN978-1-59947-127-3.
  • Oord, Thomas (2010). Defining Love. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press. ISBN978-1-58743-257-six.
  • Batson, Charles (1991). The Altruism Question. Mahwah: L. Erlbaum, Associates. ISBN978-0-8058-0245-0.
  • Nowak, M. A. (2006). "Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation". Science. 314 (5805): 1560–1563. Bibcode:2006Sci...314.1560N. doi:10.1126/science.1133755. PMC3279745. PMID 17158317.
  • Fehr, E.; Fischbacher, U. (2003). "The nature of human being altruism". Nature. 425 (6960): 785–791. Bibcode:2003Natur.425..785F. doi:10.1038/nature02043. PMID 14574401. S2CID 4305295.
  • Comte, Auguste, Catechisme positiviste (1852) or Catechism of Positivism, tr. R. Congreve, (London: Kegan Paul, 1891)
  • Knox, T. (1999). "The volunteer's folly and socio-economic man: some thoughts on altruism, rationality, and community". Journal of Socio-Economics. 28 (iv): 475–967. doi:10.1016/S1053-5357(99)00045-1.
  • Kropotkin, Peter, Mutual Help: A Gene of Evolution (1902)
  • Oord, Thomas (2004). Science of Love. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press. ISBN978-1-932031-seventy-6.
  • Nietzsche, Friedrich, Across Good and Evil
  • Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, The Philosophy of Poverty (1847)
  • Lysander Spooner, Natural Law
  • Matt Ridley, The Origins of Virtue
  • Oliner, Samuel P. and Pearl Thousand. Towards a Caring Society: Ideas into Action. West Port, CT: Praeger, 1995.
  • Axelrod, Robert (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation . New York: Basic Books. ISBN978-0-465-02121-5.
  • Dawkins, Richard (1989). The Selfish Cistron . Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford Academy Press. ISBN978-0-19-286092-7.
  • Wright, Robert (1995). The Moral Animal. New York: Vintage Books. ISBN978-0-679-76399-four.
  • Madsen, E. A.; Tunney, R. J.; Fieldman, G.; Plotkin, H. C.; Dunbar, R. I. M.; Richardson, J. One thousand.; McFarland, D. (2007). "Kinship and altruism: A cross-cultural experimental written report". British Journal of Psychology. 98 (Pt 2): 339–359. doi:ten.1348/000712606X129213. PMID 17456276.
  • Wedekind, C.; Milinski, M. (1996). "Human Cooperation in the simultaneous and the alternating Prisoner's Dilemma: Pavlov versus Generous Tit-for-tat". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 93 (7): 2686–2689. Bibcode:1996PNAS...93.2686W. doi:ten.1073/pnas.93.7.2686. PMC39691. PMID 11607644.
  • Monk-Turner, East.; Blake, Five.; Chniel, F.; Forbes, S.; Lensey, L.; Madzuma, J. (2002). "Helping easily: A study of donating behavior". Gender Bug. 20 (4): 65–seventy. doi:10.1007/s12147-002-0024-2. S2CID 144977956.
  • Public Library, Brooklyn (1919). Bulletin of the Brooklyn Public Library.

External links [edit]

  • Media related to Altruism at Wikimedia Commons
  • Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Biological Altruism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Altruism on In Our Fourth dimension at the BBC
  • "The Good Testify". Radiolab. Flavor nine. Episode 1. New York. fourteen December 2011. WNYC.
  • Richard Kraut (2016) Altruism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

halcombablefte.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism

0 Response to "What Are Its Benefits of Modernism to Art? Does It Have Any Limitations? What Are They?"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel