Article Possibility of conjunction between altruism and egoism

[C C]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-023-02163-2

ABSTRACT: Both altruism and egoism are two types of motivations for action. An altruistic action is performed to benefit the other, whereas egoistic action is performed to benefit oneself.

The strict definition of altruism states that an action ceases to be altruistic if the actor receives the benefit of his action as a consequence directly or indirectly.

On the other hand, egoism particularly psychological egoism presupposes that all actions, whether performed for oneself or the other, are always self-interested in nature and hence, egoistic. Given the dichotomous existence between the two types of actions, which on many occasions create conceptual misapprehension, a different alternative will be explored.

The new inquiry will throw light on the possibility that we commit some kind of motivational extremism on a conceptual level. It will further be argued that altruism and egoism may have one singular motivational source through which various actions emerge... (MORE - the paper)

[Zinjanthropos]

I thought of The Borg for some reason. Altruistic in a sense that they want peace and harmony throughout the universe but as for ego, I think it goes out the window unless one thinks being assimilated was a boost.

But we're not the Borg so yes, I can see people thinking of others while feeling good about their actions. However there may be moments when they don't. Do you think soldiers fighting for their fellow countrymen feel good about themselves? Feel good part entails killing/wounding someone, destruction of property, etc so not sure if if that is something I need to be egotistical over. Survival however might tend to bring out one's selfish side...idk

[Syne]

Sounds like a weak justification for virtue-signalling, where the supposed altruistic action is actually driven by the egoistic impulse to self-aggrandize.

[Secular Sanity]

However there may be moments when they don't. Do you think soldiers fighting for their fellow countrymen feel good about themselves? Feel good part entails killing/wounding someone, destruction of property, etc so not sure if if that is something I need to be egotistical over. Survival however might tend to bring out one's selfish side...idk

Yes, there's lots of ego involved in killing and destruction. Have you ever read any of Karl Marlantes' books?

"We mistakenly assume that bodily survival has a higher precedence than ego survival. This is simply not generally true. Ego will happily destroy the body for its own sake."
—Karl Marlantes

[stryder]

I tend to think of it as a bit like a cross between Asimov's "Laws of Robotics" and Ever increasing circles, from High priority to lesser priority (okay this might be a little OCD).

1. Starting at the centre, it's about us (egocentrism), we spend the most time with ourselves, so it's natural to have to deal with things at that level.
   
2. We are then surrounded by close-family (whether they are there through a pseudo-stockholm syndrome or not)
   
3. We then have then have more distant family that we know, who we might obligue more of a response than that of a complete stranger.
   
4. We then have the community such as neighbours (e.g. religion etc) and the people surround where you live who you might have an interaction with (or not)
   
5. This gets us to the point of our region (A county or state)
   
6. Then the country we reside in overall.
   
7. Finally we concern ourselves with the world.
   

Some people may weight the order differently. For instance item 3 and 4 could be switched. (It's more reminiscent of "Clan" mentality at that point.

Such a system doesn't of course force you to have to use it. I mean you can concern yourself about the world for the environment or what goes on, without actually worrying about your country you are in or what your neighbour is doing, even though in the hypothetical listed they should be a higher priority.

Having a family is likely to switch priority positions further, for instance you might worry about the future for your child, or their childrens children (Which gets more and more distant from yourself not just because of physical distance but the time they live in) That why some peoples focus is on the world.

Altruism (not the version that's just for vane credibility sake) can actually be anything from the inversion of the list to moving the egocentric point to they very end rather than the beginning. (This of course leads to people having martyr complexes)

In the case of those that commit atrocities (Such as terrorist, suicide bombers and the disenfranchised) the list probably would be written completely differently altogether. (They might strike our everything but the closest friends and even then have their own ego or religion/belief system preciding over that)

In my list above, I use it as a guide, however if I see it advantageous from a "game theory" perspective to put others first, then I'd likely do so (i.e. unless a sociopath is trying to manipulate me etc)

[Zinjanthropos]

Yes, there's lots of ego involved in killing and destruction. Have you ever read any of Karl Marlantes' books?

"We mistakenly assume that bodily survival has a higher precedence than ego survival. This is simply not generally true. Ego will happily destroy the body for its own sake."
—Karl Marlantes

No to Karl.

Don’t find his conclusion as incredible insight. Just saying…..No ego without a body. Sounds like Karl says the ego kills the body because it’s a good thing. Maybe ego is undesirable for many things, is recognized as such and then it applies the coup de grace for the betterment of all.

[Magical Realist]

Bear in mind that ego-centered behavior is only favored by natural selection when it promotes the reproduction of its genome. The mother bird who only hunts for and eats worms for herself is not favored over the one who hunts for and feeds worms to her chicks. Selfishness is quickly eliminated from our DNA because it tends to be non-reproductive.. We are hardwired towards each other. That's how our species has come to be so successful.

[confused2]

We are hardwired towards each other. That's how our species has come to be so successful.

By over-riding that hardwiring is how individuals come to be so successful.

[Zinjanthropos]

We are hardwired towards each other. That's how our species has come to be so successful.

By over-riding that hardwiring is how individuals come to be so successful.

May be, but what makes a billionaire visit the Titanic in a risky, problematic submersible?

[confused2]

We are hardwired towards each other. That's how our species has come to be so successful.

By over-riding that hardwiring is how individuals come to be so successful.

May be, but what makes a billionaire visit the Titanic in a risky, problematic submersible?

Could it be the same thing that made them a billionaire in the first place? Something unusual in the wiring department?