Religion and Charity

2003

The paper defines altruism as charity. The second section of the paper criticizes three rationalistic (what is called ‘‘interactional’’) theories of altruism, viz., the egoistic, egocentric, and altercentric perspectives. The third section criticizes three normative (what is named ‘‘selfactional’’) theories of altruism, viz., the Kantian, the socialization argument, and ‘‘warm glow’’ story. The fourth section elaborates on three implications of altruism qua charity. First, while altruism differs from self-interest, it is still within the domain of rational theory. Second, altruism should not be confused with parental care or, what is the same thing, philanthropy. Third, altruism should be distinguished from honesty. 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. PsycINFO classification: 2360; 2950; 3020 JEL classification: D0

Transactions of The American Philological Association, 2000

2012

Altruism is a malleable notion that is understood differently in various disciplines. The common denominator of most definitions of altruism is the idea of unidirectional helping behaviour. However, a closer examination reveals that the term altruism sometimes refers to the outcomes of a helping behaviour for the agent and its neighbours -i.e. reproductive altruism -and sometimes to what motivates the agent to help others -i.e. psychological altruism. Since these perspectives on altruism are crucially different, it is important to use a clear terminology to avoid confusion. In particular, we show that the notion of altruism used by biologists profoundly differs from the ones used by philosophers, psychologists and economists in cross-disciplinary debates about human altruism.

Altruism and Altruistic Behaviours

Evolutionary Biological Science

We argue that some organisms are altruistically motivated and such altruistic motivation is adaptive. We lay out the helper’s decision problem—determining whether to help another organism. We point out that there are more ways of solving this problem than most people recognize. Specifically, we distinguish two kinds of altruistic motivations, depending on whether a desire to help is produced for one’s own sake or for others’ sake. We identify circumstances in which either kind of psychological altruism provides the most adaptive solution to the helper’s decision problem. As a result, we show that both kinds of psychological altruism are likely to be instantiated and selected for.

Journal of Economic Psychology, 2004

The paper defines altruism as charity. The second section of the paper criticizes three ratio-8 nalistic (what is called ''interactional'') theories of altruism, viz., the egoistic, egocentric, and 9 altercentric perspectives. The third section criticizes three normative (what is named ''self-ac-10 tional'') theories of altruism, viz., the Kantian, the socialization argument, and ''warm glow'' 11 story. The fourth section elaborates on three implications of altruism qua charity. First, while 12 altruism differs from self-interest, it is still within the domain of rational theory. Second, altru-13 ism should not be confused with parental care or, what is the same thing, philanthropy. Third, 14 altruism should be distinguished from honesty. 15

Social Thought and Research, 1981

The position is taken that the altruistic person who is giving a reward to another is in a one-up or dominating position. The person receiving the reward is in a submissive role by virtue of acceptance of the reward. They may even feel that the reward is a cost if they are unable to reciprocate. Equity may enter into the context as the target of the altruism seeks to reestablish balance. While altruistic behavior may not result in immediate reward on the part of the "rewarder," there may be delayed or vicarious reward.

Altruism is a deep and complex phenomenon that is analysed by scholars of various disciplines, including psychology, philosophy, biology, evolutionary anthropology and experimental economics. Much confusion arises in current literature because the term altruism covers variable concepts and processes across disciplines. Here we investigate the sense given to altruism when used in different fields and argumentative contexts. We argue that four distinct but related concepts need to be distinguished: (a) psychological altruism, the genuine motivation to improve others' interests and welfare; (b) reproductive altruism, which involves increasing others’ chances of survival and reproduction at the actor’s expense; (c) behavioural altruism, which involves bearing some cost in the interest of others; and (d) preference altruism, which is a preference for others' interests. We show how this conceptual clarification permits the identification of overstated claims that stem from an imprecise use of terminology. Distinguishing these four types of altruism will help to solve rhetorical conflicts that currently undermine the interdisciplinary debate about human altruism.

Study of Changing Societies: Comparative and Interdisciplinary Focus, Vol. 2'(4) 2012

, we will try to concern the nature and content of the altruistic behavior, the forms and the reasons of altruism. The author systematizes different typologies of altruism. The objective to look for the motives of altruistic behavior. One of crucial part of the paper is concerned about possible benefits of altruism nowadays. The article also concentrates on critics of altruism, trying to understand, why people are skeptical about altruistic acts.

Essays in Philosophy, vol. 18, Issue 1 (2017), 2017