Pathological altruism seems rampant on this board, at least in the political threads. So it's worth calling out. Its definition may vary, but essentially it occurs when a well-meaning person seeks to aid a third person, but fails to appreciate the harm to the third person caused by such good intentions - harm which is reasonable foreseeable to an external observer. There's a peer-reviewed paper on the subject: http://www.pnas.org/content/110/Supplement_2/10408.full.pdf+html
Pathological altruism is evident in the "living wage" discussion, where its proponents dismiss the harm of job losses and price increases; and in some instances charge that if a business cannot afford to pay a "living wage" it should not be in business. What happens to workers should that be the rule? A minimum-wage job is better than no job.
I'm sure there are many other examples.
Pathological altruism is evident in the "living wage" discussion, where its proponents dismiss the harm of job losses and price increases; and in some instances charge that if a business cannot afford to pay a "living wage" it should not be in business. What happens to workers should that be the rule? A minimum-wage job is better than no job.
I'm sure there are many other examples.