Altruism ~ Nature or Nurture?

To what degree do you think 'nature' and 'nurture' are responsible for the presence or absence (or degree) of altruism in someone's thinking and behaviour?

Originally posted by FMF
To what degree do you think 'nature' and 'nurture' are responsible for the presence or absence (or degree) of altruism in someone's thinking and behaviour?

I have never heard a satisfactory biological reason for altruism yet.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have never heard a satisfactory biological reason for altruism yet.

What satisfactory reason for altruism have you heard?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have never heard a satisfactory biological reason for altruism yet.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/

Originally posted by FMF
What satisfactory reason for altruism have you heard?

The usual stuff about how co-operation in animals (ant colonies was cited once that I recall) produced altruism.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The usual stuff about how co-operation in animals (ant colonies was cited once that I recall) produced altruism.

What "biological reason" have you heard that you found not satisfactory?

Originally posted by FMF
What "biological reason" have you heard that you found not satisfactory?

The one that I just cited. Are you stupid?

The link provided by apathist in the post several lines above this one appears to cover the biological aspect satisfactorily, if one takes the time to study it.

Personally, I think "nurture" and "nature" would both be represented. A child acquires genes from its parents, and also observes the behaviour of its parents. So a child inheriting the altruistic gene would have the reinforcement of observation of the behaviour of the parent who passed on that gene.

Originally posted by Kewpie
The link provided by apathist in the post several lines above this one appears to cover the biological aspect satisfactorily, if one takes the time to study it.

Personally, I think "nurture" and "nature" would both be represented. A child acquires genes from its parents, and also observes the behaviour of its parents. So a child inheriting the altruistic ...[text shortened]... ld have the reinforcement of observation of the behaviour of the parent who passed on that gene.

and there is evidence of an altruistic gene? like the rather elusive gay gene. As an existentialist I reject wholeheartedly the genetic predisposition argument. Why? because we are free moral agents with recourse to the faculty of conscience and can act irrespective of a genetic predisposition because predisposition is not the same as a causation, unfortunately for those pandering the idea that it is. To think otherwise is to assert that we are automatons at the mercy of our genes.

Originally posted by FMF
To what degree do you think 'nature' and 'nurture' are responsible for the presence or absence (or degree) of altruism in someone's thinking and behaviour?

Mostly nature with some nurture. I think it can be shown that all complete psychopaths are that way because of a specific physical aspect of their brains - so not necessarily genetic, but still, in this context, to be counted as 'nature'.
When it comes to day to day more subtle behaviour, that is more affected by nurture and we can see some differences between cultures (but not very significant differences).

Originally posted by FMF
To what degree do you think 'nature' and 'nurture' are responsible for the presence or absence (or degree) of altruism in someone's thinking and behaviour?

Given that this is the spirituality forum, you have posed a false dichotomy in that some respondents clearly believe in a third option (God).

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
and there is evidence of an altruistic gene? like the rather elusive gay gene. As an existentialist I reject wholeheartedly the genetic predisposition argument. Why? because we are free moral agents with recourse to the faculty of conscience and can act irrespective of a genetic predisposition because predisposition is not the same as a causation, u ...[text shortened]... a that it is. To think otherwise is to assert that we are automatons at the mercy of our genes.

I'm still not convinced sir you know what an 'existentialist' is.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
and there is evidence of an altruistic gene? like the rather elusive gay gene. As an existentialist I reject wholeheartedly the genetic predisposition argument. Why? because we are free moral agents with recourse to the faculty of conscience and can act irrespective of a genetic predisposition because predisposition is not the same as a causation, u ...[text shortened]... a that it is. To think otherwise is to assert that we are automatons at the mercy of our genes.

I think we should accept the possibility that you may never hear an explanation for altruism that satisfies you, and move on with our lives.

Originally posted by JS357
I think we should accept the possibility that you may never hear an explanation for altruism that satisfies you, and move on with our lives.

A rather cheap ad hominem in contrast to my reasoned and measured post on why I have rejected the arguments proffered so far.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I'm still not convinced sir you know what an 'existentialist' is.

Existentialism is a philosophy that emphasizes individual existence, freedom and choice. It is the view that humans define their own meaning in life, and try to make rational decisions despite existing in an irrational universe.

Which defines my world view to a T although I must point out that I am a Christian existentialist more like Kierkegaard as opposed to Satre who attempted to draw all possibilities form a position of 'consistent atheism.'