WEBVTT - BrainStuff Classics: Do Truly Unselfish Acts Really Exist?

0:00:01.840 --> 0:00:07.600
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Brainstuff, a production of iHeartRadio. Hey brain Stuff

0:00:07.680 --> 0:00:11.280
<v Speaker 1>Lauren vogelbaumb here with a classic episode from our archives.

0:00:12.080 --> 0:00:16.560
<v Speaker 1>This one gets into some actual brain stuff. It's about

0:00:16.560 --> 0:00:21.320
<v Speaker 1>the psychology and sociology of altruism. Why do we do

0:00:21.560 --> 0:00:24.599
<v Speaker 1>nice things for other people even at our own expense?

0:00:26.880 --> 0:00:30.159
<v Speaker 1>Hey brain Stuff, Lauren vogelbomb here. Is there such a

0:00:30.200 --> 0:00:33.880
<v Speaker 1>thing as a truly unselfish altruistic act? One in which

0:00:33.880 --> 0:00:37.040
<v Speaker 1>someone benefits while the person performing the act receives nothing

0:00:37.080 --> 0:00:40.600
<v Speaker 1>in return. You could debate the philosophy of harm and good,

0:00:40.600 --> 0:00:44.159
<v Speaker 1>of cause and effect, of intent and result, and philosophers

0:00:44.159 --> 0:00:47.199
<v Speaker 1>have for pretty much ever. But looking at it from

0:00:47.200 --> 0:00:50.599
<v Speaker 1>another angle, why would we humans possess a sense of

0:00:50.600 --> 0:00:54.120
<v Speaker 1>selflessness or altruism in the first place? Is there a

0:00:54.160 --> 0:00:59.120
<v Speaker 1>biological basis for your good deeds? Whenever researchers use magnetic

0:00:59.200 --> 0:01:02.279
<v Speaker 1>resonance imaging or MRI to observe test subjects as they

0:01:02.320 --> 0:01:05.240
<v Speaker 1>perform a particular task, it seems that some new secret

0:01:05.240 --> 0:01:08.080
<v Speaker 1>of our brains is unlocked, and altruism is no exception.

0:01:09.160 --> 0:01:12.640
<v Speaker 1>One two thousand and six study focused on anonymous charitable donations,

0:01:12.800 --> 0:01:16.479
<v Speaker 1>which are pretty specific altruistic acts the giver receives no

0:01:16.520 --> 0:01:20.000
<v Speaker 1>tangible reward. They give away hard earned money to benefit

0:01:20.040 --> 0:01:23.120
<v Speaker 1>a total stranger, and they can't expect any thinks because

0:01:23.160 --> 0:01:26.920
<v Speaker 1>the donation is anonymous. It's altruism at perhaps its purest,

0:01:28.080 --> 0:01:31.280
<v Speaker 1>But researchers found that the subjects who contributed to charities

0:01:31.360 --> 0:01:35.000
<v Speaker 1>did receive some benefit the warm fuzzies. In the study,

0:01:35.040 --> 0:01:37.959
<v Speaker 1>the volunteers had a choice. They could keep money or

0:01:38.120 --> 0:01:42.160
<v Speaker 1>donate it to charities of differing ideologies. The researchers found

0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:44.840
<v Speaker 1>that giving money activated the same reward center in the

0:01:44.840 --> 0:01:49.320
<v Speaker 1>brain that was activated when the participants received money. Another

0:01:49.360 --> 0:01:51.800
<v Speaker 1>study in two thousand and seven also used MRI to

0:01:51.840 --> 0:01:55.560
<v Speaker 1>study the phenomenon of altruism. These researchers, however, concluded that

0:01:55.600 --> 0:01:58.400
<v Speaker 1>people aren't altruistic because they receive a good feeling when

0:01:58.400 --> 0:02:01.040
<v Speaker 1>they perform a selfless act, but because they perceive that

0:02:01.120 --> 0:02:04.600
<v Speaker 1>others are likely to return the favor. The researchers found

0:02:04.600 --> 0:02:06.919
<v Speaker 1>that the area of the brain that's activated when people

0:02:07.120 --> 0:02:10.920
<v Speaker 1>analyze social bonds indicates that before we do something nice

0:02:10.919 --> 0:02:13.560
<v Speaker 1>for someone else, we might first examine whether or not

0:02:13.600 --> 0:02:15.760
<v Speaker 1>that person would reciprocate if the shoe were on the

0:02:15.760 --> 0:02:18.960
<v Speaker 1>other foot. If we think someone else would act altruistically

0:02:19.000 --> 0:02:21.800
<v Speaker 1>toward us, the study suggests we would be more likely

0:02:21.840 --> 0:02:27.720
<v Speaker 1>to act altruistically toward that person. According to evolutionary theory, however,

0:02:28.000 --> 0:02:31.720
<v Speaker 1>behaviors develop when they help living things to survive. Animals

0:02:31.760 --> 0:02:34.480
<v Speaker 1>feel discomfort when they're hungry, signaling it's time to eat.

0:02:34.880 --> 0:02:36.760
<v Speaker 1>A plant might shed its leaves in the fall to

0:02:36.840 --> 0:02:39.520
<v Speaker 1>create a protective mulch barrier to keep its roots warm

0:02:39.600 --> 0:02:42.959
<v Speaker 1>during the winter. Flora and fauna survive by looking out

0:02:42.960 --> 0:02:46.840
<v Speaker 1>for themselves. By this logic, altruisms shouldn't even exist because

0:02:46.880 --> 0:02:49.400
<v Speaker 1>behaviors that make it through the process of natural selection

0:02:49.840 --> 0:02:53.760
<v Speaker 1>need to help that creature, or at least its genetic material, survive.

0:02:55.120 --> 0:02:57.880
<v Speaker 1>So the idea that we have a natural imperative to

0:02:57.919 --> 0:03:00.440
<v Speaker 1>help others at our own detriment fly in the face

0:03:00.480 --> 0:03:04.320
<v Speaker 1>of evolutionary theory. Altruism must serve some unseen purpose that

0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:08.320
<v Speaker 1>favors our survival. Take the example of a parent risking

0:03:08.360 --> 0:03:11.120
<v Speaker 1>their life to save their childs or helping your sibling

0:03:11.120 --> 0:03:13.400
<v Speaker 1>out with a loan when they're in a crunch. These

0:03:13.480 --> 0:03:16.919
<v Speaker 1>both support the belief that altruism is kinship based, meaning

0:03:16.919 --> 0:03:20.120
<v Speaker 1>our blood relatives are generally the beneficiaries of our altruism,

0:03:20.480 --> 0:03:23.560
<v Speaker 1>which lends itself to an extension that altruism exists to

0:03:23.600 --> 0:03:27.800
<v Speaker 1>protect the genetic line. Author Richard Dawkins, in his book

0:03:27.840 --> 0:03:31.080
<v Speaker 1>The Selfish Gene, considers humans as mere vehicles for a

0:03:31.120 --> 0:03:34.240
<v Speaker 1>genetic line. Since we pass on half of our genes.

0:03:34.360 --> 0:03:36.800
<v Speaker 1>When we protect our offspring or blood relatives at the

0:03:36.880 --> 0:03:39.720
<v Speaker 1>risk of our own lives, our altruistic behavior is merely

0:03:39.720 --> 0:03:43.560
<v Speaker 1>our genes acting to protect their lineage. There are other

0:03:43.600 --> 0:03:48.000
<v Speaker 1>interpretations of altruism within the sciences. However, one explanation posits

0:03:48.000 --> 0:03:51.360
<v Speaker 1>that altruism lies not within some genetic urge, but outside

0:03:51.400 --> 0:03:56.520
<v Speaker 1>of ourselves. French sociologist Emildur Kem stripped any application of

0:03:56.640 --> 0:03:59.360
<v Speaker 1>terms like good to describe acts of altruism in his

0:03:59.440 --> 0:04:03.640
<v Speaker 1>theories concerning morality. To dirk Hem, altruism existed outside of

0:04:03.640 --> 0:04:07.120
<v Speaker 1>the individual. It was an external social force prescribed and

0:04:07.200 --> 0:04:10.000
<v Speaker 1>demanded not for the benefit of any individual, but for

0:04:10.000 --> 0:04:14.440
<v Speaker 1>the benefit of society, simply to keep society intact. Dirkhm

0:04:14.480 --> 0:04:18.200
<v Speaker 1>defined altruism as the violent and voluntary act of self

0:04:18.279 --> 0:04:21.960
<v Speaker 1>destruction for no personal benefit, and the opposite of rational

0:04:22.000 --> 0:04:26.839
<v Speaker 1>self interest to the sociologist, behaviors like altruism exist because

0:04:26.880 --> 0:04:28.479
<v Speaker 1>the needs of the society and the needs of the

0:04:28.480 --> 0:04:32.600
<v Speaker 1>individual are at odds. Since people perceive the collective group

0:04:32.680 --> 0:04:35.960
<v Speaker 1>to be more important than the individual, self sacrificing behavioral

0:04:35.960 --> 0:04:39.279
<v Speaker 1>concepts like altruism are required to keep the individual in

0:04:39.400 --> 0:04:43.840
<v Speaker 1>line and subservient to the greater good. Although Dirkhm's critics

0:04:43.839 --> 0:04:46.600
<v Speaker 1>say he jumps to conclusions in his explanation for altruism

0:04:46.680 --> 0:04:50.560
<v Speaker 1>and morality in general, other anthropologists side with his interpretation.

0:04:51.320 --> 0:04:54.080
<v Speaker 1>Some consider it an impossibility for society to have developed

0:04:54.120 --> 0:04:59.120
<v Speaker 1>without the cooperation that altruism fosters. The implication that altruism

0:04:59.160 --> 0:05:02.880
<v Speaker 1>is an external so social mechanism is sometimes called social subjectivism,

0:05:03.240 --> 0:05:06.080
<v Speaker 1>which is more widely defined as the belief that groups

0:05:06.120 --> 0:05:10.719
<v Speaker 1>of people, not individuals, collectively create our reality and perhaps

0:05:10.800 --> 0:05:14.760
<v Speaker 1>especially concepts of truth and morality. It means that we

0:05:14.839 --> 0:05:17.760
<v Speaker 1>as a group have managed to create an intangible ideal

0:05:18.080 --> 0:05:22.440
<v Speaker 1>like altruism and created its high value as well. People

0:05:22.480 --> 0:05:25.080
<v Speaker 1>see those who make personal sacrifices for the common good

0:05:25.480 --> 0:05:28.440
<v Speaker 1>or for the good of another person as noble and admirable.

0:05:29.160 --> 0:05:31.479
<v Speaker 1>If Dirkham and others who share a like mind about

0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:34.479
<v Speaker 1>altruism are correct, then we have bought into altruisms so

0:05:34.600 --> 0:05:37.720
<v Speaker 1>deeply that our brains have evolved to deliver pleasure to

0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:42.839
<v Speaker 1>us when we perform selfless acts. To individualists or egoists

0:05:42.920 --> 0:05:45.760
<v Speaker 1>or objectivists, on the other hand, the concept of altruism

0:05:45.839 --> 0:05:49.040
<v Speaker 1>as a social fabrication is a dangerous thing, something that

0:05:49.120 --> 0:05:52.880
<v Speaker 1>defies true human nature. The idea here is that every

0:05:52.920 --> 0:05:55.839
<v Speaker 1>person is responsible for their own life and happiness, and

0:05:55.880 --> 0:05:59.360
<v Speaker 1>that we must let every other person be equally self responsible.

0:06:00.200 --> 0:06:03.680
<v Speaker 1>This belief follows that altruistic behavior allows people to be

0:06:03.720 --> 0:06:07.800
<v Speaker 1>exploited by detalitarian governments trying to control people's lives write

0:06:07.839 --> 0:06:12.120
<v Speaker 1>down to people's moral right to exist. Altruism, in this view,

0:06:12.160 --> 0:06:15.240
<v Speaker 1>is an aspect of subservience with a dubious benefit of

0:06:15.279 --> 0:06:19.640
<v Speaker 1>having been duped into feeling good about it. It seems

0:06:19.720 --> 0:06:21.800
<v Speaker 1>we've gone a bit far afield to answer such a

0:06:21.839 --> 0:06:24.520
<v Speaker 1>seemingly simple question. Is there such a thing as a

0:06:24.520 --> 0:06:28.279
<v Speaker 1>truly unselfish act? If MRI evidence is accurate, then we

0:06:28.360 --> 0:06:32.000
<v Speaker 1>have the reward system to contend with. If evolutionists are correct,

0:06:32.040 --> 0:06:34.760
<v Speaker 1>then we perform altruistic acts in order to ensure the

0:06:34.760 --> 0:06:38.600
<v Speaker 1>survival of our genes, and if subjectivists or objectivists are right,

0:06:38.839 --> 0:06:42.000
<v Speaker 1>then we're altruistic merely because we conform to social standards.

0:06:42.440 --> 0:06:45.960
<v Speaker 1>So far, the existence for a truly unselfish act isn't

0:06:45.960 --> 0:06:49.960
<v Speaker 1>looking good. But there are two silver linings to this

0:06:50.120 --> 0:06:53.600
<v Speaker 1>admittedly sort of dark cloud. Although we are rewarded one

0:06:53.600 --> 0:06:56.520
<v Speaker 1>way or another by performing an altruistic act, it still

0:06:56.560 --> 0:06:59.159
<v Speaker 1>remains up to the individual whether or not to perform one.

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:02.359
<v Speaker 1>Of helping one another feels good, does that make it

0:07:02.400 --> 0:07:10.640
<v Speaker 1>any less worthwhile? Today's episode is based on the article

0:07:10.920 --> 0:07:13.680
<v Speaker 1>is there such a thing as a truly unselfish act?

0:07:13.800 --> 0:07:17.080
<v Speaker 1>On how stuffworks dot Com written by Josh Clark. Brain

0:07:17.120 --> 0:07:20.040
<v Speaker 1>Stuff is production of iHeartRadio in partnership with how stuffworks

0:07:20.040 --> 0:07:22.880
<v Speaker 1>dot Com and is produced by Tyler Klang. Four more

0:07:22.920 --> 0:07:26.960
<v Speaker 1>podcasts from my heart Radio visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,

0:07:27.080 --> 0:07:29.040
<v Speaker 1>or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.