Author Topic: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?  (Read 226 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« on: November 27, 2018, 02:21:00 PM »
Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?

Humans are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species, yet at present, our rich and powerful allow the poorest of us to starve to death by hoarding their wealth. This is unheard of in the animal world.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Generally speaking, in ancient days the rich and powerful insured that the poor were taken care of to the best of their ability.  In the past, the rank and file demanded that the rich and powerful live up to that good altruistic trait by revolting against them. The French Revolution is a good example of this. Have the rank and file lost their altruistic and good characters by allowing the rich and powerful to let people starve to death while doing nothing?

Are the notions of liberty, equality, and fraternity dead in the world?

Is mankind at the point of losing the altruistic instincts that has made us the greatest animal that the world has ever produced?

Regards
DL

Offline Nick

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 13475
  • Darwins +414/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2018, 03:50:57 PM »
Yes, 1% control 95% of the wealth world wide.  We are moving to a have and have not world.  That can't be good for either side.
Yo, put that in your pipe and smoke it.  Quit ragging on my Lord.

Religions are the dingle berries on the butt hairs of civilization.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 14876
  • Darwins +628/-67
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2018, 03:56:40 PM »
Yes, 1% control 95% of the wealth world wide. We are moving to a have and have not world. That can't be good for either side.

That usually precedes a violent uprising of the "have-nots" and a mass slaughter of the "haves". Luckily, I'm not in the latter group.
My names are many, yet I am One.
-Orion, son of Fire and Light, Sol Invictus.

Religions need books because they don't have gods.

Discord: https://discord.gg/Hhz7Ff2

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2018, 04:12:18 PM »
Yes, 1% control 95% of the wealth world wide.  We are moving to a have and have not world.  That can't be good for either side.

Who do you think is to blame?

The rich or the rest of us for not caring enough about the full demography to force that one man to share in a moral way?

Regards
DL

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2018, 04:13:48 PM »
Yes, 1% control 95% of the wealth world wide. We are moving to a have and have not world. That can't be good for either side.

That usually precedes a violent uprising of the "have-nots" and a mass slaughter of the "haves". Luckily, I'm not in the latter group.

The rich do not seem to care, or are they as powerless as the rest of us seem to be. Who is running this world?

Regards
DL

Online LoriPinkAngel

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2139
  • Darwins +244/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • I'm Your Nurse, Not Your Waitress...
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #5 on: November 27, 2018, 05:26:55 PM »
Yes, 1% control 95% of the wealth world wide. We are moving to a have and have not world. That can't be good for either side.

That usually precedes a violent uprising of the "have-nots" and a mass slaughter of the "haves". Luckily, I'm not in the latter group.

The rich do not seem to care, or are they as powerless as the rest of us seem to be. Who is running this world?

Regards
DL

The people who are paid enough to be comfortable by the 1% are running everything.  So they are puppets for the 1%.
It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long.  But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #6 on: November 27, 2018, 05:54:09 PM »
Yes, 1% control 95% of the wealth world wide. We are moving to a have and have not world. That can't be good for either side.

That usually precedes a violent uprising of the "have-nots" and a mass slaughter of the "haves". Luckily, I'm not in the latter group.

The rich do not seem to care, or are they as powerless as the rest of us seem to be. Who is running this world?

Regards
DL

The people who are paid enough to be comfortable by the 1% are running everything.  So they are puppets for the 1%.

And we are their puppets.

Any suggestion as to how to cut our strings, or is violence what we have to wait for?

Regards
DL

Offline jdawg70

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 5114
  • Darwins +1095/-10
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2018, 09:45:00 AM »
Humans are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline stuffin

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1663
  • Darwins +120/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2018, 11:54:41 AM »
I think the question should be: Have the rich and powerful ever had altruistic instincts?
Don't stop smiling at the world and keep your head full of hope.

Offline YouCantHandleTheTruth

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 949
  • Darwins +125/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2018, 12:14:53 PM »
I think the question should be: Have the rich and powerful ever had altruistic instincts?

Exactly.  I'm also not sure what point Greatest I Am is trying to make here either, with regards to this site.  In addition, it's not entirely true.  There are organizations like The Giving Pledge.  That organization has 184 individuals, to this point, all filthy rich, who have pledged over $365 billion to charity, and they come from 22 different countries.  Some of the richest people in the world have made huge pledges under this organization (Bill and Melinda Gates, Warren Buffett, Elon Musk, etc.)

What about the Combined Federal Campaign?  Why do people fund Go Fund Me accounts, sometimes at their own peril, like with the fake homeless story the other week?

I'm not entirely sure that the rich aren't trying to help other people.  You'd need a solid study to back that up, that shows consistently where people like Mark Cuban aren't giving any of their money to help causes.  I think part of the problem is there are SO many causes, and not enough filthy rich people.  If you're in the middle class, like so many, and have a family, mortgage, and so on, your main concern might not be that starving child in Nigeria.  If you add to it that you're a Christian family, you might just say "Meh, I'll pray for them and God will take care of it."

Let's not throw out that possibility too - Christians, and other religious people, aren't giving to charity.  They're giving to their churches - and as we know, there's a huge difference.  So many churches (especially in more affluent nations like the U.S.) have massive overhead, and the money doesn't go to those in need.  It goes to the pastors and the upkeep of the building.  I remember attending a church meeting on finances and being stunned at how much of the income of the church went to all of that.  It's a big reason people say that these places are just social clubs.  You're not giving most of your money away to help those in need.  You're paying your pastors salaries, and to be able to keep coming back to the same building to see your same friends week after week.  To be fair, the Combined Federal Campaign, mentioned above, has a similar problem, though not with the social club aspect.  They too have overhead salaries - so people like to donate directly to charities. 

A good study might be this - of religious people in the United States, how many give to charities outside of their church?  I'm guessing that most only give to their church, and no other charity (or if so, very, very little).

People also give not only to their own species, but to animal shelters.  Animal lovers may be more willing to give to animals than to humans.  I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. 

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5159
  • Darwins +363/-39
  • Gender: Male
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2018, 12:19:33 PM »
I think we should talk about how the world poverty rate has been on a steady, steep decline over the past few decades thanks to socialism.



If you have internet access and can afford it, you are among the richest people in the world. 

https://voxeu.org/article/parametric-estimations-world-distribution-income

« Last Edit: November 28, 2018, 12:30:23 PM by Mr. Blackwell »
I am not sure how to describe the intricacies of this Hell, so I chose to begin with the most common or prominent theme of Hell, which is uncertainty.

Offline YouCantHandleTheTruth

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 949
  • Darwins +125/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2018, 12:45:27 PM »
I think we should talk about how the world poverty rate has been on a steady, steep decline over the past few decades thanks to socialism.



If you have internet access and can afford it, you are among the richest people in the world. 

https://voxeu.org/article/parametric-estimations-world-distribution-income

Well said - I think we tend to think only of our own country and don't see the big picture.  That being said, if you can afford to donate 2% of your income to help others still in poverty, then it's a noble cause.  If you don't give but complain about the rich, you could be part of the problem. 

All we can do is our part, and encourage others.  Even if we're among the richest in the world though, it's all relative.  Many are living paycheck to paycheck or in credit card debt.  The vast majority of people aren't Donald Trump (and thank goodness for that).
« Last Edit: November 28, 2018, 12:47:03 PM by YouCantHandleTheTruth »

Offline jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 8955
  • Darwins +1139/-27
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2018, 01:37:06 PM »
To the best of my knowledge, humans aren't particularly altruistic by nature.

I'd wager that most people who practice altruism do so in order to appear altruistic to others, rather than any inherent desire to be altruistic for its own sake.  Consider how many people get to put their name on something by donating money to some cause.  Or who get public recognition.  Or even just to show something off.

It isn't that altruism is somehow malfunctioning with people who are rich.  There are other reasons they may not feel the need to be altruistic to those worse off than them.
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline YouCantHandleTheTruth

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 949
  • Darwins +125/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2018, 02:05:49 PM »
To the best of my knowledge, humans aren't particularly altruistic by nature.

I'd wager that most people who practice altruism do so in order to appear altruistic to others, rather than any inherent desire to be altruistic for its own sake.  Consider how many people get to put their name on something by donating money to some cause.  Or who get public recognition.  Or even just to show something off.

It isn't that altruism is somehow malfunctioning with people who are rich.  There are other reasons they may not feel the need to be altruistic to those worse off than them.

It's a great point.  And it makes me think of one of the Bible verses I actually like - one that shows that humility.  Matthew 6:3-4.  "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you."

Of course, this premise is flawed as well - because supposedly God is watching, and again there's a reward.  So - you're still giving for YOUR benefit, as you point out above.  Still, I'm thinking whoever put in that verse was fed up with obnoxious people who touted how great they were by giving so much to others.

It could be the case with The Giving Pledge too.  I don't know.  But I also think people do give out of the goodness of their hearts, and if you're very rich, you may feel some guilt.  But in the case of animals - don't some of you give because it breaks your heart to see those shivering animals, and you want to help them all?  Here's what's weird - those commercials affect me way more than the ones with suffering kids.  But both are helpless.  I think a lot of people have a heart for the helpless - in particular, the elderly, animals and children. 


Offline stuffin

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1663
  • Darwins +120/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2018, 02:59:45 PM »
To the best of my knowledge, humans aren't particularly altruistic by nature.

I'd wager that most people who practice altruism do so in order to appear altruistic to others, rather than any inherent desire to be altruistic for its own sake.  Consider how many people get to put their name on something by donating money to some cause.  Or who get public recognition.  Or even just to show something off.

It isn't that altruism is somehow malfunctioning with people who are rich.  There are other reasons they may not feel the need to be altruistic to those worse off than them.

It's a great point.  And it makes me think of one of the Bible verses I actually like - one that shows that humility.  Matthew 6:3-4.  "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you."

Of course, this premise is flawed as well - because supposedly God is watching, and again there's a reward.  So - you're still giving for YOUR benefit, as you point out above.  Still, I'm thinking whoever put in that verse was fed up with obnoxious people who touted how great they were by giving so much to others.

It could be the case with The Giving Pledge too.  I don't know.  But I also think people do give out of the goodness of their hearts, and if you're very rich, you may feel some guilt.  But in the case of animals - don't some of you give because it breaks your heart to see those shivering animals, and you want to help them all?  Here's what's weird - those commercials affect me way more than the ones with suffering kids.  But both are helpless.  I think a lot of people have a heart for the helpless - in particular, the elderly, animals and children.

The concept of giving because you know god is watching and he will reward you down the line certainly is self serving. As a matter of fact, being good and carrying out god's will to get to heaven can be considered a type of bribery. Reminds me of not being allowed to pray for riches. So what if your child has cancer and you can't afford the treatments, or some other life wrecking scenario? Would it be okay to ask god for help in winning the lottery for a million dollars if that is what it would take to solve your dilemma?

I'm right here with you on the animals, I hate to see them suffer. Humans? It will depend on the situation. I try to give to the animals by taking GREAT CARE of any pet I have had. Right now I have a cat, a stray I picked off the street and he is treated better then a king.

I give to only select charities, I avoid any religious one. There are some really good religious charities like St Jude, but I lean towards neutral charities like the DAV  or ones who research things like pancreatic cancer.
Don't stop smiling at the world and keep your head full of hope.

Offline Nick

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 13475
  • Darwins +414/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2018, 04:32:17 PM »
I think we should talk about how the world poverty rate has been on a steady, steep decline over the past few decades thanks to socialism.



If you have internet access and can afford it, you are among the richest people in the world. 

https://voxeu.org/article/parametric-estimations-world-distribution-income
Socialism has nothing to do with this.
Yo, put that in your pipe and smoke it.  Quit ragging on my Lord.

Religions are the dingle berries on the butt hairs of civilization.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5159
  • Darwins +363/-39
  • Gender: Male
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2018, 04:36:09 PM »
The least among us.

Matthew 25:40
I swim in a sea of poverty barely keeping my head afloat.
I swim silently past others who are drowning
I watch the yachts pass by us and can't help but wonder,
why don't they throw more life boats down?
I am not sure how to describe the intricacies of this Hell, so I chose to begin with the most common or prominent theme of Hell, which is uncertainty.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2018, 07:25:59 PM »
I think the question should be: Have the rich and powerful ever had altruistic instincts?

The answer would be yes. We are all born with it unless born with a mental defect. It is connected directly to our selfish gene which has been proven with experiments with babies.

Regards
DL

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2018, 07:27:42 PM »
Humans are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species



Really!!

To the point where even scientists are having a hard time explaining it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ADgh3yCSdM

Regards
DL

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2018, 07:31:06 PM »
[

"I'm not entirely sure that the rich aren't trying to help other people."
"You'd need a solid study to back that up,"

 Look at that graph for the first time.

What study could say more?

Regards
DL

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2018, 07:36:04 PM »
I think we should talk about how the world poverty rate has been on a steady, steep decline over the past few decades thanks to socialism.


I know of no true socialist country, I see us all living in oligarchies, but that aside, we have indeed made great strides against poverty, in spite of the great inequality in the most affluent nations.

Pulling someone out of poverty and making working poor is not the best we can do if the rich would share.

You cannot deny the stats I put in the O.P.

Regards
DL


Offline wright

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3374
  • Darwins +222/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #21 on: November 29, 2018, 01:56:27 AM »
Really!!

To the point where even scientists are having a hard time explaining it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ADgh3yCSdM

Regards
DL



But... in the video you link to, Dawkins doesn't find it difficult to explain in a Darwinian sense. Nor does this one link provide evidence for your statement that we "are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species." For that matter, I'm not convinced that the very wealthy of the past were any better at being mindful of the needs and desires of the very poor. Can you show evidence for that assertion as well?

I'll grant that the human ability to abstract lets us empathize with other species (though we're not the only animals to demonstrate such behavior) to the point where humans will sometimes risk their lives to save animals with which they have no personal connection.

Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline stuffin

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1663
  • Darwins +120/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #22 on: November 29, 2018, 09:36:38 AM »
I think the question should be: Have the rich and powerful ever had altruistic instincts?

The answer would be yes. We are all born with it unless born with a mental defect. It is connected directly to our selfish gene which has been proven with experiments with babies.

Regards
DL

I think the opposite is true, Greed is an instinct, not Altruism.

Quote
For example, greed must certainly have been adaptive for early cave dwellers. In times of scarcity, a greedy caveman who refused to share his food stores at the onset of winter would have been more likely to survive until spring and hence would have enjoyed higher fitness (reproductive success) than a generous one who shared his limited resources with the less fortunate. Natural selection programmed us to be selfish. Greed is a natural human instinct -- we are all selfish and greedy at heart, and for sound evolutionary reasons. Currently, we have institutionalized runaway greed, allowing others to become billionaires -- what sense does it make to have more than you can actually use?

http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/thoc/HumanInstincts.html
________________________________________________________________________________________________




Further I rememberI from my biology classes in college that humans don't have instincts, just reflexes, all other behaviors are learned.

Quote
Psychologist Abraham Maslow argued that humans no longer have instincts because we have the ability to override them in certain situations. He felt that what is called instinct is often imprecisely defined, and really amounts to strong drives. For Maslow, an instinct is something which cannot be overridden, and therefore while the term may have applied to humans in the past, it no longer does.[3]

The book Instinct (1961) established a number of criteria which distinguish instinctual from other kinds of behavior. To be considered instinctual, a behavior must follow these criteria: a) be automatic, b) be irresistible, c) occur at some point in development, d) be triggered by some event in the environment, e) occur in every member of the species, f) be unmodifiable, and g) govern behavior for which the organism needs no training (although the organism may profit from experience and to that degree the behavior is modifiable).[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct



Quote
List of Human Instincts.-- Waiving, then, the question of the order of appearance, we find the generally recognized instincts in man to be as follows: Fear, anger, shyness, curiosity, affection, sexual love, jealousy and envy, rivalry, sociability, sympathy, modesty ( ?), play, imitation, constructiveness, secretiveness, and acquisitiveness.

https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Angell/Angell_1906/Angell_1906_p.html



PS, I really liked your video, but I still thjnk your viewing this backwards, it's greed as the baseline for human behavior, not Altruism










« Last Edit: November 29, 2018, 09:49:22 AM by stuffin »
Don't stop smiling at the world and keep your head full of hope.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #23 on: November 29, 2018, 11:25:13 AM »
Really!!

To the point where even scientists are having a hard time explaining it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ADgh3yCSdM

Regards
DL



But... in the video you link to, Dawkins doesn't find it difficult to explain in a Darwinian sense. Nor does this one link provide evidence for your statement that we "are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species." For that matter, I'm not convinced that the very wealthy of the past were any better at being mindful of the needs and desires of the very poor. Can you show evidence for that assertion as well?

I'll grant that the human ability to abstract lets us empathize with other species (though we're not the only animals to demonstrate such behavior) to the point where humans will sometimes risk their lives to save animals with which they have no personal connection.

You make my point by showing our altruism extends even to lower animals.

"Nor does this one link provide evidence for your statement that we "are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species."

I am always eager to learn. What species do you see as more altruistic?

As to the ancients looking after the poor. They did not have the great security that the rich have today in their gated communities and if the did not provide the bread to go along with the circuses, they would have lived in constant fear.

Regards
DL

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #24 on: November 29, 2018, 11:48:39 AM »
I think the question should be: Have the rich and powerful ever had altruistic instincts?

The answer would be yes. We are all born with it unless born with a mental defect. It is connected directly to our selfish gene which has been proven with experiments with babies.

Regards
DL

I think the opposite is true, Greed is an instinct, not Altruism.

Quote
For example, greed must certainly have been adaptive for early cave dwellers. In times of scarcity, a greedy caveman who refused to share his food stores at the onset of winter would have been more likely to survive until spring and hence would have enjoyed higher fitness (reproductive success) than a generous one who shared his limited resources with the less fortunate. Natural selection programmed us to be selfish. Greed is a natural human instinct -- we are all selfish and greedy at heart, and for sound evolutionary reasons. Currently, we have institutionalized runaway greed, allowing others to become billionaires -- what sense does it make to have more than you can actually use?

http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/thoc/HumanInstincts.html
________________________________________________________________________________________________




Further I rememberI from my biology classes in college that humans don't have instincts, just reflexes, all other behaviors are learned.

Quote
Psychologist Abraham Maslow argued that humans no longer have instincts because we have the ability to override them in certain situations. He felt that what is called instinct is often imprecisely defined, and really amounts to strong drives. For Maslow, an instinct is something which cannot be overridden, and therefore while the term may have applied to humans in the past, it no longer does.[3]

The book Instinct (1961) established a number of criteria which distinguish instinctual from other kinds of behavior. To be considered instinctual, a behavior must follow these criteria: a) be automatic, b) be irresistible, c) occur at some point in development, d) be triggered by some event in the environment, e) occur in every member of the species, f) be unmodifiable, and g) govern behavior for which the organism needs no training (although the organism may profit from experience and to that degree the behavior is modifiable).[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct



Quote
List of Human Instincts.-- Waiving, then, the question of the order of appearance, we find the generally recognized instincts in man to be as follows: Fear, anger, shyness, curiosity, affection, sexual love, jealousy and envy, rivalry, sociability, sympathy, modesty ( ?), play, imitation, constructiveness, secretiveness, and acquisitiveness.

https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Angell/Angell_1906/Angell_1906_p.html



PS, I really liked your video, but I still thjnk your viewing this backwards, it's greed as the baseline for human behavior, not Altruism

Greed and altruism, to my mind, go hand in hand as they both come out of our selfish gene.

Our selfish gene defaults to cooperation as that is the best survival technique. Competition might kill us while cooperation does not.

If we are cooperating with the environment and hoarding food for the winter, that can be seen as greed but I would just say it is common sense.

It would become greed if the owner does not share with his fellow cave dwellers and lets them starve to death but that would mean that they are ignoring their tribal instincts and the rest of the tribe would likely reject them from the tribe.

You have quite the list of human instincts that pop up. If fear is the first as you say, I can likely agree with that since insecurity for the weakest animal on the planet would certainly be fearful, but that fear is expressed by cooperation as the primary or best method to survival.

That seems to be what research is showing. I admit to being a bit loose and flexible with terms and try to get away from semantics but have a look at this clip to see if what I said was correct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LIb22-5Lwg

Regards
DL



Offline wright

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3374
  • Darwins +222/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #25 on: November 29, 2018, 01:27:45 PM »

You make my point by showing our altruism extends even to lower animals.

Sure, I agree with you there.

Quote
"Nor does this one link provide evidence for your statement that we "are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species."

I am always eager to learn. What species do you see as more altruistic?

You're the one who said we're the most altruistic. Is this just your opinion, or do you have actual evidence? What is it that makes us more so than dolphins, who are also cognitive animals that will risk their lives for other species?

Quote
As to the ancients looking after the poor. They did not have the great security that the rich have today in their gated communities and if the did not provide the bread to go along with the circuses, they would have lived in constant fear.

Regards
DL

Please: I'm asking for actual evidence that the very rich / powerful "ancients" (rather vague, could you be more specific as to what historical period you're referring to?) were actually more responsive to the have-nots than their counterparts of today. Vague historical references don't cut it. YouCantHandleTheTruth already pointed out that there are those of the very wealthy today who do give extensively to those less fortunate.
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline stuffin

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1663
  • Darwins +120/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #26 on: November 29, 2018, 01:45:28 PM »
Greed and altruism, to my mind, go hand in hand as they both come out of our selfish gene.

Our selfish gene defaults to cooperation as that is the best survival technique. Competition might kill us while cooperation does not.

If we are cooperating with the environment and hoarding food for the winter, that can be seen as greed but I would just say it is common sense.

It would become greed if the owner does not share with his fellow cave dwellers and lets them starve to death but that would mean that they are ignoring their tribal instincts and the rest of the tribe would likely reject them from the tribe.

You have quite the list of human instincts that pop up. If fear is the first as you say, I can likely agree with that since insecurity for the weakest animal on the planet would certainly be fearful, but that fear is expressed by cooperation as the primary or best method to survival.

That seems to be what research is showing. I admit to being a bit loose and flexible with terms and try to get away from semantics but have a look at this clip to see if what I said was correct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LIb22-5Lwg

Regards
DL

Although tempting, I'm not convinced by that 60 minute piece. For one thing, researchers can and frequently have their own greedy goals. For another, those babies were 5 and 6 months old, already with some learned behaviors, very questionable how much they have already seen and/or learned affected their choices (an instinct is something which cannot be overridden). Plus, there was not a 100% same choice by the babies every time. Granted the rates were high, >75%, but they didn't explain why the other babies didn't make the Altruistic choice. Make us see what they want us to see?

I did find the older kids choices intriguing.

Don't stop smiling at the world and keep your head full of hope.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2018, 01:53:13 PM »

You make my point by showing our altruism extends even to lower animals.

Sure, I agree with you there.

Quote
"Nor does this one link provide evidence for your statement that we "are the most altruistic and good of all the animal species."

I am always eager to learn. What species do you see as more altruistic?

You're the one who said we're the most altruistic. Is this just your opinion, or do you have actual evidence? What is it that makes us more so than dolphins, who are also cognitive animals that will risk their lives for other species?

Quote
As to the ancients looking after the poor. They did not have the great security that the rich have today in their gated communities and if the did not provide the bread to go along with the circuses, they would have lived in constant fear.

Regards
DL

Please: I'm asking for actual evidence that the very rich / powerful "ancients" (rather vague, could you be more specific as to what historical period you're referring to?) were actually more responsive to the have-nots than their counterparts of today. Vague historical references don't cut it. YouCantHandleTheTruth already pointed out that there are those of the very wealthy today who do give extensively to those less fortunate.

I gave the logic trail on this based on security.

The only other thing I can offer is the fact that slavery was never made illegal or immoral in the ancient days as that was really a form of welfare if you can see slaves as those at the bottom of the demographic pyramid as synonymous with welfare recipients at the bottom of ours. If we did not give to the poor in that way, they would use force against us to survive and the rich know s why our rich oligarch owners have paid their politicians to create the welfare system.

"You're the one who said we're the most altruistic. Is this just your opinion, or do you have actual evidence? What is it that makes us more so than dolphins, who are also cognitive animals that will risk their lives for other species?"

It is opinion based on the logic that the weakest and most insecure animal on the planet would need the most altruism to survive and thrive. I could not break that logic and reason so based my opinion on it.

I also went by this information.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ADgh3yCSdM

Regards
DL

Offline Greatest I am

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Darwins +13/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Have the rich and powerful lost their altruistic instincts?
« Reply #28 on: November 29, 2018, 02:00:40 PM »
Greed and altruism, to my mind, go hand in hand as they both come out of our selfish gene.

Our selfish gene defaults to cooperation as that is the best survival technique. Competition might kill us while cooperation does not.

If we are cooperating with the environment and hoarding food for the winter, that can be seen as greed but I would just say it is common sense.

It would become greed if the owner does not share with his fellow cave dwellers and lets them starve to death but that would mean that they are ignoring their tribal instincts and the rest of the tribe would likely reject them from the tribe.

You have quite the list of human instincts that pop up. If fear is the first as you say, I can likely agree with that since insecurity for the weakest animal on the planet would certainly be fearful, but that fear is expressed by cooperation as the primary or best method to survival.

That seems to be what research is showing. I admit to being a bit loose and flexible with terms and try to get away from semantics but have a look at this clip to see if what I said was correct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LIb22-5Lwg

Regards
DL

Although tempting, I'm not convinced by that 60 minute piece. For one thing, researchers can and frequently have their own greedy goals. For another, those babies were 5 and 6 months old, already with some learned behaviors, very questionable how much they have already seen and/or learned affected their choices (an instinct is something which cannot be overridden). Plus, there was not a 100% same choice by the babies every time. Granted the rates were high, >75%, but they didn't explain why the other babies didn't make the Altruistic choice. Make us see what they want us to see?

I did find the older kids choices intriguing.

It is rather intriguing.

I cannot explain why 1/4 of the babies did not follow the general trend.

I applied logic and reason to what the results were and from a survival POV. I can see where cooperation would be seen or used by our instincts as the better survival tactic which would surround us with friends instead of competition tactic that would create enemies or losers to those competitions and have us have enemies around us.

Regards
DL