Pathological Altruism

[arkirk]

Such as this ?

http://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?2345-Pathological-Altruism&p=63585&viewfull=1#post63585



Key word here being productivity (in view of the specific I was replying to). There seems to be an assumption that an overtired worker due to an accumulation of working hours is going to be productive. That their interaction with customers is going to reflect a customer oriented service promoted by the business/company they work for.

Working to live or "living wage" ought to signify generating an income which meets one's Basic Living Expenses. By "Basic", most people will understand that it addresses shelter, utilities, food, transportation, clothing and a budgeting which allows for savings ("rainy days" situations). The symptoms of an ongoing inadequate living wage are ever so present within the elderly population of folks who today have no choice but depend on their children's assistance. They are representative of a generation of "those at the bottom" who despite of working hard and long hours had no flexibility in their budget to save up for older days.

If no children or no willing children, those folks will have to supplement their SS check by picking up manual jobs here and there. In such fashion, the elderly who gather carts from the parking lot of a grocery store and bag groceries. A common sight in my geographical area.

40 hr/wk at minimum wage is above the poverty line for one person.

Two people at 40 hr/wk at minimum wage is above the poverty line unless they have too many kids.

The reality is that most people below the poverty line are not working 40 hr/wk.

So then, Loren, things are just fine the way they are...is that what you are saying? Those lazy fucking bastards! Not working long enough to suit you. There is absolutely no reason to suspect that YOU would ever be guilty of pathological altruism. You would wring every last drop of sweat out of those worthless job seekers, demanding high productivity, then quietly absconding with the lion's share of the proceeds. No reason to feel guilty. That's just how this ideal system works.

As for sub prime loans: Those were not altruism. Those were swindles.
As for private pension funds discharged in bankruptcy courts by large corporations...That never was altruism because altruism requires good intentions and these pensions have largely lately been just another form of swindle. They were sold to the workers, then snatched away with all manner of excuses that no doubt were considered at the time the pensions were negotiated in the first place. They start out as "pensions" and then get degraded to "legacy costs" that must be renegotiated downward and ultimately shed if the corporation stays in business.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If there wasn't a problem why did Fannie Mae relax lending standards???

I asked you to support your claim with evidence. Obviously you do not understand what supporting a claim with evidence means, so I will rephrase my question. Please provide a link or a citation to an independent source that substantiates your claim that the CRA mandated loans whether or not there were enough qualified borrowers.

The problem is that you are treating it as if the rules as stated are the whole story. The reality was they had two instructions from the government:

1) Write loans corresponding to the deposits from the area.

2) Don't write bad loans.

The problem was that these rules were in conflict, it was impossible to comply with both other than by pulling out of disadvantaged areas.

Rule #1 is easy to measure compliance. Rule #2 is not. Thus in practice they will obey #1 at the expense of #2.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact that people are taking the low-wage jobs shows there aren't high wage jobs available.

This doesn't follow.

If the high wage jobs existed why would anyone actually take the low wage jobs?

 

[bilby]

I asked you to support your claim with evidence. Obviously you do not understand what supporting a claim with evidence means, so I will rephrase my question. Please provide a link or a citation to an independent source that substantiates your claim that the CRA mandated loans whether or not there were enough qualified borrowers.

The problem is that you are treating it as if the rules as stated are the whole story. The reality was they had two instructions from the government:

1) Write loans corresponding to the deposits from the area.

2) Don't write bad loans.

The problem was that these rules were in conflict, it was impossible to comply with both other than by pulling out of disadvantaged areas.

Rule #1 is easy to measure compliance. Rule #2 is not. Thus in practice they will obey #1 at the expense of #2.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact that people are taking the low-wage jobs shows there aren't high wage jobs available.

This doesn't follow.

If the high wage jobs existed why would anyone actually take the low wage jobs?

According to Jobseeker.com.au, there are over 300 CEO vacancies in Brisbane, Australia.

Does this imply that it is impossible to fill vacancies for forklift drivers, night fillers, and fast food clerks?

Should I quit and apply for one of those positions? They exist...

 

[AthenaAwakened]

In a "libertarian" paradise, there are no social pressures, privileges or constraints, other than markets and they are naturally moral. Since there are no outsides forces imposing unfairness on the population, any failings must be within the individual.

So, if low wage jobs have applicants it is because high wage jobs don't exist because markets dictate that self interested people will always take the high paid job. The only reason they wouldn't would be such jobs don't exist or the moral failings within the individuals involved limit their taking advantage of opportunities available.

 

[RavenSky]

Pathological altruism seems rampant on this board, at least in the political threads...

Any post that starts out trying to portray everyone on this board as "pathological" anything is not worth reading further because it is obviously nothing more than goading bullshit.

 

[thebeave]

Well, here's some altruism that will really warm your heart. Just think of all the hundreds of people who went to bed that night knowing what a wonderful and amazing random act of kindness they did that day!

http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/more-than-250-have-paid-it-forward-at-local-starbucks-and-the-chain-is/2193784

There really is hope for America!!

 

[KeepTalking]

Well, here's some altruism that will really warm your heart. Just think of all the hundreds of people who went to bed that night knowing what a wonderful and amazing random act of kindness they did that day!

http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/more-than-250-have-paid-it-forward-at-local-starbucks-and-the-chain-is/2193784

There really is hope for America!!

Sorry, but this is a perfect example of pathological altruism. Because of some person's unthinking good intention of paying for someone else's coffee, someone else spilled their free coffee, and ruined a perfectly good shirt.

 

[dystopian]

The fact that people are taking the low-wage jobs shows there aren't high wage jobs available.

This doesn't follow.

If the high wage jobs existed why would anyone actually take the low wage jobs?

Right. I mean, it's not as if people look at anything else but the money when deciding what job to perform in life!

Oh... wait.

 

[arkirk]

Well, here's some altruism that will really warm your heart. Just think of all the hundreds of people who went to bed that night knowing what a wonderful and amazing random act of kindness they did that day!

http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/more-than-250-have-paid-it-forward-at-local-starbucks-and-the-chain-is/2193784

There really is hope for America!!

Sorry, but this is a perfect example of pathological altruism. Because of some person's unthinking good intention of paying for someone else's coffee, someone else spilled their free coffee, and ruined a perfectly good shirt.

Shit happens! Still good intentions are good intentions. If you don't start with good intentions, where can your efforts go anyway but down? I don't believe we should always be guarding ourselves and protecting ourselves from good intentions. In fact, it would be better for all of us if we would promote good intentions rather than promote the concept of pathological altruism. In a way, the concept of "pathological altruism" is an oxymoronic idea. The more you look for it, the more of it there is. Shit happens. We all know what good intentions are. The fact that something outside our consideration of the moment can spoil a good deed is just a fact of life. It did not make the act of giving the coffee any more "pathological."

 

[Emily Lake]

Shit happens! Still good intentions are good intentions. If you don't start with good intentions, where can your efforts go anyway but down? I don't believe we should always be guarding ourselves and protecting ourselves from good intentions. In fact, it would be better for all of us if we would promote good intentions rather than promote the concept of pathological altruism. In a way, the concept of "pathological altruism" is an oxymoronic idea. The more you look for it, the more of it there is. Shit happens. We all know what good intentions are. The fact that something outside our consideration of the moment can spoil a good deed is just a fact of life.

akirk, I believe that's rather the point that the article was attempting to make. In a very large number of cases, the bad outcomes aren't outside the consideration of a reasonably objective person. But the person invested in the well-intentioned action refuses to consider any possible negative outcomes, because they are so enamored of the intention of their deed.

The point is that perhaps one should stop and do a bit more considering, a bit more objectively, before committing oneself to a well-intentioned action.

That certainly isn't arguing that anyone should stop doing good deeds, or that altruism is always bad, or anything else that is irreducibly absurd. By all means, consider being nice and practicing random acts of kindness. But consider the potential consequences of your actions as well... and consider them objectively. Listen to critics with an open mind, instead of simply closing them down as obstructionists. And when your well-meaning action causes harm, don't just wave it off blithely as "well, shit happens, and I meant well", especially not if the shit that happened was easily foreseeable!

****Coffee spills are not representative of the general spirit of my soap-box speech****

 

[KeepTalking]

Sorry, but this is a perfect example of pathological altruism. Because of some person's unthinking good intention of paying for someone else's coffee, someone else spilled their free coffee, and ruined a perfectly good shirt.

Shit happens! Still good intentions are good intentions. If you don't start with good intentions, where can your efforts go anyway but down? I don't believe we should always be guarding ourselves and protecting ourselves from good intentions. In fact, it would be better for all of us if we would promote good intentions rather than promote the concept of pathological altruism. In a way, the concept of "pathological altruism" is an oxymoronic idea. The more you look for it, the more of it there is. Shit happens. We all know what good intentions are. The fact that something outside our consideration of the moment can spoil a good deed is just a fact of life. It did not make the act of giving the coffee any more "pathological."

OK, so I thought a sarcasm tag was not needed in that post. Serves me right for not including it, but that post was actually dripping with sarcasm.

 

[laughing dog]

I wonder if the 2nd amendment to the US constitution qualifies as an example of pathological altruism.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Interesting topic!

I have wondered sometimes if there's a tendency among atheists to ignore the dangers of attempted altruism... perhaps because of the "biblical" overtones of such idioms as "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". So many of the parables and fables used to teach the dangers of good intentions are biblical in nature - "Give a man a fish..." for example. I've never understood by it seems so offensive to some people to step back and consider the potential consequences of an altruistic action.

Because they bothered to study labor history and/or understand the larger picture.

We are already paying via housing assistance, food stamps, energy assistance.

 

[Trausti]

Pathological altruism seems rampant on this board, at least in the political threads...

Any post that starts out trying to portray everyone on this board as "pathological" anything is not worth reading further because it is obviously nothing more than goading bullshit.

Where did I write that?

- - - Updated - - -

I wonder if the 2nd amendment to the US constitution qualifies as an example of pathological altruism.

No.

 

[Emily Lake]

Interesting topic!

I have wondered sometimes if there's a tendency among atheists to ignore the dangers of attempted altruism... perhaps because of the "biblical" overtones of such idioms as "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". So many of the parables and fables used to teach the dangers of good intentions are biblical in nature - "Give a man a fish..." for example. I've never understood by it seems so offensive to some people to step back and consider the potential consequences of an altruistic action.

Because they bothered to study labor history and/or understand the larger picture.

We are already paying via housing assistance, food stamps, energy assistance.

I believe you're missing my forest for your trees...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Because they bothered to study labor history and/or understand the larger picture.

We are already paying via housing assistance, food stamps, energy assistance.

I believe you're missing my forest for your trees...

Give a person a red herring and they'll obfuscate for a day, teach them the art of fallacies and they'll obfuscate for a lifetime.

 

[laughing dog]

I wonder if the 2nd amendment to the US constitution qualifies as an example of pathological altruism.

No.

Do you really think the "founding fathers" intended to have nutjobs running around with sophisticated weaponry beyond their dreams with no legal mechanism to curb them?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The fact that people are taking the low-wage jobs shows there aren't high wage jobs available.

This doesn't follow.

If the high wage jobs existed why would anyone actually take the low wage jobs?

Right. I mean, it's not as if people look at anything else but the money when deciding what job to perform in life!

Oh... wait.

If they consider the low wage jobs superior then they would be worse off if the low wage jobs were eliminated.

Likewise, the earlier argument about qualifications--removing the low wage jobs won't magically make them qualified for high wage jobs.

I can see no scenario where a bunch of them don't end up unemployable.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

No.

Do you really think the "founding fathers" intended to have nutjobs running around with sophisticated weaponry beyond their dreams with no legal mechanism to curb them?

These would be the same FF, mind you, who disenfranchised a bulk of the white male population because only land owners could vote.

 

[Trausti]

No.

Do you really think the "founding fathers" intended to have nutjobs running around with sophisticated weaponry beyond their dreams with no legal mechanism to curb them?

The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with altruism, pathological or otherwise. It was simply a reaffirmation of the 1689 English Bill of Rights.