Real Benevolence?

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

Are people really genuinely benevolent, or do people just like the warm fuzzy feeling inside that says "I'm a good person". I am leaning towards psychodynamics, so I am inclined to think the latter to be correct, as there is no logical reason on an evolutionary level to be charitable to people who cannot possibly return the favor.

[ParanoidPhantom]

I think that there is always some kind of gain in it for the person even if they aren't consciously aware of it, whether that gain is the warm, fuzzy feeling, approval from society or a desire to avoid disapproval for not helping, or some other kind of gain.

An evolutionary reason for helping people could be that helping others leads to improving society as a whole and therefore making it more likely to survive but I'm aware that it could be argued that killing off weaker members and leaving just the strong would have the same effect. The only counter-argument to that that I can see (other than the morality of it) would be that it might not be so obvious what would count as strong as there are obviously traits other than physical strength which would prove beneficial to society.

[Himster]

Are people really genuinely benevolent, or do people just like the warm fuzzy feeling inside that says "I'm a good person". I am leaning towards psychodynamics, so I am inclined to think the latter to be correct, as there is no logical reason on an evolutionary level to be charitable to people who cannot possibly return the favor.

Evolution is for the survival of the social organism, not the individual. If it was built on the individual we'd still be living in caves.

Doing good things makes one feel good; unless you're a sociopath.

There are people who are genuinely benevolent, but they're rarer and more special than one might think.

[Lord Rahl]

People are genuinely benevolent. If we weren't we wouldn't have friends or relationships.

[Plant]

Well, are you asking that if we are to do good, whatever your defintion of good may be, it is only an act of good if it is an action done for the goodness itself?

That is, if there are reward functions in our own psychology, then it is not truly good we are doing, but only our own reinforced actions which give us pleasurably feelings or action which are done because they are the only socially acceptable course of action, and in effect the action is helping themselves by taking the course which gives the greatest result for them?

This would need the definition of doing good to be one such that good can only be done, if the action is done despite the opportunity cost of doing such an action would be lower than to not do such an action. Such as giving money to a chraity is not a benovolent act, if it is done because the guilt of otherwise not doing so is worse to their own wellbeing of not doing so.

People are genuinely benevolent. If we weren't we wouldn't have friends or relationships.

You have no connection between your statements. You have not explained why having friendships or relationships is a prove of benevolence. Afterall, these bonds between people, are created precisely for the reason of feeling better about yourself. Otherwise we would not have friendships of relationships, if they did not give us any pleasurable feelings.

Do you not enjoy your friendships and relationships? Or do these friendships and relationships cause you unhappiness, but you keep and create them because you think it is a benevolent action?

[CobraStallone]

Are people really genuinely benevolent, or do people just like the warm fuzzy feeling inside that says "I'm a good person". I am leaning towards psychodynamics, so I am inclined to think the latter to be correct, as there is no logical reason on an evolutionary level to be charitable to people who cannot possibly return the favor.

I have a sort of philosophical view in wich I think that people only do things to feel better themselves. Or on the contrary to avoid feeling bad for not doing what they are supposed to do, and not really out of benevolence. I think it even goes up to the point when they might not even realize it if they think about it but hedonism is the real engine behind their actions.

[Helm]

I like to think we've moved slightly beyond the purely instinctual phase and we have some kind of non-supernatural sourced freewill.

[iudas]

Some people are naturally empathic. There's nothing evolutionary about it (we're past the 'survival of the fittest' stage). But I agree, most individuals aren't genuinely caring about the suffering of others, and it's for the better.

[Himster]

Some people are naturally empathic. There's nothing evolutionary about it (we're past the 'survival of the fittest' stage). But I agree, most individuals aren't genuinely caring about the suffering of others, and it's for the better.

We aren't past the survival of the fittest, the fittest still propagate the most successfully through natural selection, I've never heard of a man that has not gotten into a fight (verbal/physical) over a woman, there is still the competition to copulate.

The only type of person that could walk past a crying child lost in a shopping mall would have to be a sociopath; sociopaths are the least likely to reproduce, except through rape or something.

[iudas]

[QUOTE=Himster;9144645]We aren't past the survival of the fittest, the fittest still propagate the most successfully through natural selection,
What do you mean by "most successfully"? The humans who would have been unfit to live in a wild environment survive in our society, and the vast majority of them manage to reproduce. The ugly and weak males might choose ugly wives, but they still have at least as many children as their superior friends, even if they're also ugly.

I've never heard of a man that has not gotten into a fight (verbal/physical) over a woman, there is still the competition to copulate.

What? I'd find that extremely degrading. I suppose it depends on how subtle the 'fight' is, but that's not a situation I can imagine myself in.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Are people really genuinely benevolent, or do people just like the warm fuzzy feeling inside that says "I'm a good person".

A hopeless niave question and neither of these are the answer.

[Helm]

Sociopaths have something actually wrong with the structure of their brains, if you were to suffer brain damage to the same region you'll find that you could quite happily torture a puupy to death. So at least we know there's actually some kind of physical property of morality in the brain.