Libby's Odyssey

What is altruism? Is there a true form of altruism? Is it possible for true altruism to exist in today’s society? The fields of philosophy and psychology have been trying to answer these questions for many years. In today’s modern world, there are motivations and agendas woven into every choice we make. How can you truly know that your actions are separate from self-interest if there are more factors that play into this than ever before? Altruism can be defined as taking part in selfless actions for the betterment of others with no intent to receive something in return. But how can we be sure that an individual action is truly altruistic?

March 2025, UWA – Chris and Niall

I think this concept was framed well in the TV show The Good Place. This show, in my opinion, does a really good job at exploring complex philosophical theories in a way that is palatable and accessible for a wide audience. The theme of altruism is woven throughout the story with the concept that an individual’s entry to the good place (the show’s version of heaven) is dependant on how many points they earn during their life on earth. Each person’s point total is calculated upon their death and it is decided whether they will go to the good place or that bad place based on this. A concept that is frequently discussed in the show is the intent behind an individuals actions. If someone performs a good deed for another, but it is out of self interest (e.g. so they will do something for you as well) that can actually result in a negative point total. This is further explored in the show, but to avoid spoiling anything, I’m just going to recommend that you go watch it!

February 2025 – bathroom door graffiti

Pure altruism is tricky to define in a modern context. A pure altruistic act would be an action that is done solely for the benefit of others without any expectation to return that action. For example, if someone sacrificed their life for the life of a stranger. Daniel Batson coined the term “empathy-altruism hypothesis”, a theory that states that someone is much more likely to act altruistically towards a person if they feel empathy towards the individual they intend to help. The likelihood that someone will assist another person in need is dependant on how emotionally close they are to that person, as well as how large they perceive that person’s need to be. With both of these factors considered, an individual is most motivated to help others without person gain when they feel empathetic towards that person.

January 2025 – lamp

On the other hand, it is often quite easy to attribute positive actions towards some form of self benefit. This lays the foundation of the argument that there is no such thing as true altruism. The main argument for this is the concept of reciprocal altruism. This highlights the possibility that acts of kindness and good will are conducted in hopes of receiving additional benefits in the long run. For example, allowing someone to confide in you about their feelings so you can later pass that on to someone else for personal gai, is not an altruistic act. Another factor that must be considered is the emotional rewards that someone may experience after helping others. Acts of kindness can trigger feelings of happiness, reduce stress and assist in fulfilling expectations imposed by society. This line of thinking aligns with ethical egoism, the theory that all acts have an element of self interest attached to them.

January 2025 – sunset on the river

When discussing altruism, social influences must not be ignored. Cultural norms and expectations alter the way we conceptualise right and wrong, meaning that different social groups may have different definitions of what a truly selfless act may be. Religion, morality and social recognition are also factors that play into different conceptualisations of altruism. While these factors are heavily tied to how communities perceive “good” and “bad”, there is also significant variation between how these concepts are outlined between different groups. If one group labels an action as selfless, but another group doesn’t agree, does that change whether the act itself is truly good?

A slightly different school of thought frames altruism as a spectrum rather than a binary, outlining that an action cannot be completely “good” or “bad”, but instead exists upon a spectrum. This idea forms the foundation of the catharsis of The Good Place, employing the idea that motivation exists upon a spectrum and is heavily dependant on context and intention. If a person gains something from what is deemed an altruistic act, does that negate its positive impact? The concept of enlightened altruism can be employed here, outlining that if someone is acting with compassionate motives but happens to gain something from that process, that fact does not make that action inherently negative. On the flip side though, it must be considered that although someone is acting with good intentions, the result may not be what is for the best for everyone. Good intentions do not make up for a bad result.

February 2025 – crow on the ocean in Albany, WA.

There are a multitude of factors that play into determining whether an act is altruistic or not, many of these factors depending on the individual’s own perception of reality based on social and moral codes. That leaves us with the question, does the possibility of personal benefit diminish the value of an altruistic act? My personal take is that an act can be considered altruistic if a person’s intentions are aligned with the goodness of the majority. Perhaps the question isn’t whether true altruism exists, but whether the pursuit of it makes the world a better place regardless.