How do atheists feel about altruism?

[Beanieboy]

I don't know how loved i would feel if I Christian helped me only because he is supposed to, because Christ tells Christians to.

I would feel much more loved from a act of kindness from someone who did it because they searched their heart and knew it to be right, who did the kindness without thinking twice, and without thinking about receiving some kind of spiritual paycheck in eternity.

So, atheists that do acts of kindness are sometimes far more loving than the Christians that know that they are supposed to do so, but do it for a future reward, or because they have to.

I'm unsure why we would even ask such a question, though. Everyone does things that are altruist or selfish or self gaining, Christian and non.
What's is sad is that Christians know that they should be altruistic, but often, aren't. This is far more sad than an atheist that claims that there is no God, and sees no need to be altruistic.

I am often quite impressed by my atheist aquaintances and friends.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

If I was as smart as you I wouldn't have so many questions for the forum. If I was as insulting as you I wouldn't have as many friends as I do. On balance, I'm comfortable with my AA, BS, and doctorate despite your pricklyness. If its any consolation, I did not major in philosophy.

Everyone on the internet has a doctorate. I've got a drawer full of them myself...

 

[Eudaimonist]

But are they as inclined to act on that philosophy as Christians would be inclined to act on theirs?

Depends on the atheist and depends on the Christian!

Not all Christians are so kind, and Christians have no monopoly whatsoever on kindness, generosity, brotherly love, etc.

Personally, I don't see this as a contest that must be won by those inclined to be the most charitable. I believe in charity in moderation. It is possible to be excessively charitable. Some Christians are that, and some atheists may even be that as well. In any case, I don't see Christians as having any special powers of kindness, as compared with atheists.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

Christians are supposed to be nice to people because Jesus said, 'As you do for the least of you you do for me.' Meaning if you give a cold hungry bum a meal and a coat you just did that for a cold hungry Jesus which gets you brownie points come judgement day. Do atheists do such kind things for people? If so why, why not?

Depends on the Atheist, but yeah I've helped people out for no real personal gain except for the nice feeling you get for helping people. Sometimes the act itself is the reward.

 

[rockaction]

If I was as smart as you I wouldn't have so many questions for the forum. If I was as insulting as you I wouldn't have as many friends as I do. On balance, I'm comfortable with my AA, BS, and doctorate despite your pricklyness. If its any consolation, I did not major in philosophy.

I just think there are two big problems with this thread.

#1) You pre-suppose that atheists don't behave altruistically, which is offensive and/or naive. Would you ever start a thread saying "Can Muslims be moral? I know they don't have Jesus, but can they be moral?"

#2) Your reason for "behaving altruistically" is out of fear of God's judgment, which invalidates it from being altruism in the first place. By definition, altruism is done without reward. If you are right about the nature of the universe, the morality God set in place is inherently selfish and not altruistic.

 

[Cabal]

I just think there are two big problems with this thread.

#1) You pre-suppose that atheists don't behave altruistically, which is offensive and/or naive. Would you ever start a thread saying "Can Muslims be moral? I know they don't have Jesus, but can they be moral?"

#2) Your reason for "behaving altruistically" is out of fear of God's judgment, which invalidates it from being altruism in the first place. By definition, altruism is done without reward. If you are right about the nature of the universe, the morality God set in place is inherently selfish and not altruistic.

As you say, this applies to not just "altruistic" charity, but to many other aspects of Christian morality as well - it's surprising to see just how many carrots-on-sticks there are in the gospel, the difference being they're promised in an afterlife instead of this life.

 

[Mling]

Christians are supposed to be nice to people because Jesus said, 'As you do for the least of you you do for me.' Meaning if you give a cold hungry bum a meal and a coat you just did that for a cold hungry Jesus which gets you brownie points come judgement day. Do atheists do such kind things for people? If so why, why not?

So the "bum" (lovely label) isn't seen as a person to empathize with (hence the label?)--he is an opportunity for the person to prove his piety and get you a reward.

When atheists do such things, it's for a much simpler reason: he is hungry and they love him enough to want to help him.

You cannot love somebody if you think of them as a pawn in your own plans for advancement.

edit: in hindsight, I realize that altruism was one of the things that slowly wedged me away from Christianity. I came to realize that the only way to truly love my neighbor was to ignore all commandments to do so.

Also, Tiger, I've only skimmed this thread--have you addressed the question of why you label an arrangement in which you are rewarded as "altruism"? As has been pointed out, altruism, by definition, is unrewarded. If you refer to "If I give this guy a sandwich, I'll get God-points and a better deal in heaven" as altruism, what's to stop somebody from calling it altruism when they, say...buy stock? Are you a super-nice, moral, altruistic, loving Christian because you gave the store $50, in exchange for various goods?

Are you being "altruistic" when you buy stocks or bonds? That's almost exactly what you're describing--nothing to do with kindness or love. Just a sound investment. Homeless people are just things to invest in?

 

[Mling]

Many Christian churches financially support things like orphanages and food pantries. Do atheists support such things beyond lip service?

I don't think atheists are bad people so much as I wonder if what drives them to do good is as powerful as those who believe God is watching them so they better be nice or else. I'm thinking Nitzche versus Plato. Plato/Socrates was all concerned about good and Nitzche said its all pointless. One believed in God and the other did not.

What are the biggest providers of international aid?

off the top of my head, I think of the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, and Doctors without Borders. All are non-religious organizations.

 

[Mling]

Agnostic here. By a strict no reward measure I do not engage in altruism. I help those I feel good about helping. That does not always mean those I feel good about being near. Things do change based on my mood.

I'll help the helpless. I'm far less apt to help the able bodied who choose to beg. However I've now decided and put into action a policy of giving to those who are picking through trash cans hopefully loking for cans and bottles to redeem.

But no strict altruism. I give when I get my reward right away in how I feel about rendering aid.

I'm inclined to think that warm-fuzzies don't count, or else only heartless people could be altruistic.

 

[jayem]

Christians are supposed to be nice to people because Jesus said, 'As you do for the least of you you do for me.' Meaning if you give a cold hungry bum a meal and a coat you just did that for a cold hungry Jesus which gets you brownie points come judgement day.

It's pretty presumptuous for an atheist to expound on Christian theology, but here goes: Good works won't make a difference with regards to achieving salvation. According to classical Protestant doctrine, one is saved purely by having faith in Jesus. Sola fide. And once one is saved, then good works are supposed to follow as a manifestation of having a new life in Jesus. But there are several NT verses implying different levels of reward in heaven, based on what one did on earth. That's always seemed very odd and contradictoryto me. I thought that attaining eternal life with Jesus in Paradise is the most perfect state of bliss possible. If some souls are honored more than others, do they have more bliss? And is there pride in heaven? Because that's what's implied by claiming that some are rewarded more than others. Maybe someone can clarify this for me.

 

[carmelsnowcone]

The fact remains that you shouldn't need extrinsic motivation to do good things, you are giving credit to your religion that it doesn't deserve.

 

[MountainCappuccino]

Christians are supposed to be nice to people because Jesus said, 'As you do for the least of you you do for me.' Meaning if you give a cold hungry bum a meal and a coat you just did that for a cold hungry Jesus which gets you brownie points come judgement day. Do atheists do such kind things for people? If so why, why not?

Some might. Would an average Christian give up their coat and meal?

 

[SithDoughnut]

I try to do good things for people. I don't often give homeless people a meal and a coat, but I support and donate to (and occasionally volunteer for) the charities that do. I figure my money will help more people that way.

However, I eat babies. So that balances things out a bit.

 

[Ayersy]

I try to do good things for people. I don't often give homeless people a meal and a coat, but I support and donate to (and occasionally volunteer for) the charities that do. I figure my money will help more people that way.

However, I eat babies. So that balances things out a bit.

I always thought that eating babies was an act of kindness?

You mean? Oh.... Oh. OHHHHHHH.

 

[quatona]

Christians are supposed to be nice to people because Jesus said, 'As you do for the least of you you do for me.' Meaning if you give a cold hungry bum a meal and a coat you just did that for a cold hungry Jesus which gets you brownie points come judgement day. Do atheists do such kind things for people? If so why, why not?

No TrueAtheist would ever do kind things for people.
Don´t let them lukewarm, lazy self-appointed atheists confuse you about this fact.

 

[Hipsterz]

The fact remains that you shouldn't need extrinsic motivation to do good things, you are giving credit to your religion that it doesn't deserve.

This post makes me wonder. Where I work we are a faith based group and our volunteers are from mostly churches or 12 step groups that believe in God. We don't get many atheists unless they are fulfilling nudge from the judge requirements.

What if people do need extrinsic motivation to do good things?

Can you construct a good argument for why people should not need them? To many here this probably seems silly but if you look at organizations that do good things for people around the world I think you would see they are by and large funded and staffed by religious organizations. If I am mistaken please point out some atheist based groups that do such things.

 

[SithDoughnut]

This post makes me wonder. Where I work we are a faith based group and our volunteers are from mostly churches or 12 step groups that believe in God. We don't get many atheists unless they are fulfilling nudge from the judge requirements.

What if people do need extrinsic motivation to do good things?

Can you construct a good argument for why people should not need them? To many here this probably seems silly but if you look at organizations that do good things for people around the world I think you would see they are by and large funded and staffed by religious organizations. If I am mistaken please point out some atheist based groups that do such things.

They exist. For example the charity EARTHWARD helps victims of religiously motivated violence. Most of the time however, there is no need to a charity to be particularly atheist, in the same way that religiously charities are. Religious charities generally exist to unite beliefs and charity together - atheists do not have these beliefs so there is no need to create an 'atheist charity'. Most charities are non-religious, so you'll find most atheists involved in charity there. I imagine most of the people involved in charities are indeed religious, for the simple reason that the majority of people in general are religious.

I'd wager that most charitable people would be charitable no matter whether they were religious or not. Religion has not monopolised kindness, nor am I convinced that it has any meaningful input on such things. Nice people are nice because they're just nice, not because they live in fear of punishment for not being so. Doing nice things because you want to do nice things is far better than doing it because of external motivation, for the simple reason that external motivations can change or disappear entirely. People can change beliefs, but if the motivation to be charitable is internal, then they'll still be that charitable person regardless of their religion. People who are only charitable out of fear or greed will not.

Of course, both situations end up in charity being done, which is always a good thing, but if we're comparing the two, charity based on external motivation is by far the inferior option.

 

[Mling]

They exist. For example the charity EARTHWARD helps victims of religiously motivated violence. Most of the time however, there is no need to a charity to be particularly atheist, in the same way that religiously charities are. Religious charities generally exist to unite beliefs and charity together - atheists do not have these beliefs so there is no need to create an 'atheist charity'. Most charities are non-religious, so you'll find most atheists involved in charity there. I imagine most of the people involved in charities are indeed religious, for the simple reason that the majority of people in general are religious.

I'd wager that most charitable people would be charitable no matter whether they were religious or not. Religion has not monopolised kindness, nor am I convinced that it has any meaningful input on such things. Nice people are nice because they're just nice, not because they live in fear of punishment for not being so. Doing nice things because you want to do nice things is far better than doing it because of external motivation, for the simple reason that external motivations can change or disappear entirely. People can change beliefs, but if the motivation to be charitable is internal, then they'll still be that charitable person regardless of their religion. People who are only charitable out of fear or greed will not.

Of course, both situations end up in charity being done, which is always a good thing, but if we're comparing the two, charity based on external motivation is by far the inferior option.

While I agree with you on the bolded part, I think the underlined part needs to be reconsidered. I think the best--actually the only-- motivation people really have to feel kindly and charitably is empathy. The ability to empathize grows mostly on because of how much contact you have with other people, and willing you are to empathize to the degree that you already can. Religion might not be able to make a person more charitable than they otherwise would be, but it sure as heck can make them less so.

By instilling a sense of "I'm right and everybody else is wrong," or "everything I do, I do for God, and not really for other people," religious teachings can sometime render a person less able and willing to empathize, and actually stunt their moral development.

People like our dear Tiger, here, show how this works pretty well, with his explanation that altrusim is nothing more than playing by the rules so you can make sure you win.

While, in an individual, kindness and altruism will depend on empathy, groups follow bell curves. In any group--religious and secular-- some people will be more empathetic than others. The power of religion isn't that a religious person will necessarily be more, or less, empathic than a secular person: it's that it can skew the whole bell curve toward one side.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Christians are supposed to be nice to people because Jesus said, 'As you do for the least of you you do for me.' Meaning if you give a cold hungry bum a meal and a coat you just did that for a cold hungry Jesus which gets you brownie points come judgement day. Do atheists do such kind things for people? If so why, why not?

The problem is that what you're describing isn't altruism, it's quid pro quo. In my experience, there's really no such thing as a Christian altruist, since every good thing they do is either following orders from God, or, as you put it, getting brownie points.

"Altruism" is the selfless concern for the welfare of others -- since Atheists don't think there's an all-powerful being keeping score, then they're the only ones who can be altruistic -- because there's absolutely nothing in it for them.

 

[Ayersy]

To be honest though, I don't really care why people do good things, just so long as they do good things. Whether they do it through fear of God, or just because they like helping people, it doesn't really matter.