Thread: Human Compassion

if they did not expect to be killed, then explain the mutiple people who have thrown themselves on grenades to save their comrades. Did they not think they would die?

Explain those that annonomuly sent gifts to RichZ to show their support durring his period of unrest regarding employment.

I do agree that most people are driven by what is best for themselves. However, there are those few that unselfishly and willingly give themselves for others, to their own detriment.

Originally Posted by mhailey

... those few that unselfishly and willingly give themselves for others, to their own detriment.

I'll re-iterate what I said earlier... this could be solely for their own self satisfaction... ie, not for a better place in an afterlife, nor for posthumous recognition... just for plain old "I need to do this because I can and it will be an act of kindness to my fellow man". The human mind works at incredible speed, particularly under duress... I'd guess those heroic actions were decided completely by the human subconscious. Certainly, we'll never really know.

It occurs to me that some of this must be indoctrination. Y'know if we're raised and taught by compassionate people who value those virtues we'll be more inclined to get behind them ourselves.

I think we have a tendency to be compassionate because it's in our nature. We're pack animals who form communities and gain benefits from being close to people. We naturally, therefore feel responsible to some degree, or at least connected to their happiness and well being.

X

I think human compassion exists and is acted on all the time. "Why" is a separate issue for me - I mean, understanding motivations is important to make sure you're not being duped from random people. But I don't tend to question the motivations of people gathering around their friend whose partner has just died, for example.

Charity, volunteering, devoting your life to teaching children, jumping on a grenade to save someone's life etc may well be the result of self-interested behaviour on that individual's behalf. But to the people who receive the outcomes of that behaviour, it's compassion.

James.

Well put James, so therefor is compassion seen by the giver? I think that true compassion can only be seen by the recipiant. If I donate my wifes organs at her request, and they help a blind person see is that compassion? Truely that can not be a long term issue, transplants have not been around that many generations.

Phil

I think it is all a part of the fabric of society. We are taught compassion and also born with some empathy for the feelings of others.

My main reason for feeling that it is inborn as well as taught is because there are some who obviously are born without any empathy whatsoever. The rest of us call them Sociopaths and lock them up as soon as we find them.

Originally Posted by Jimbo

But I don't tend to question the motivations of people gathering around their friend whose partner has just died, for example.

Originally Posted by Wildtim

We are taught compassion and also born with some empathy for the feelings of others.

These are exactly what stop me from completely buying into the selfish gene thing. I'd like to think that it's our sense of empathy which is responsible for what we call compassion, rather than an unconscious effort just to strengthen the bonds with your friends further.

There must be some of it that we're born with. Babies are practically dependent on it from us and those who are able to provide more compassion for them are much more likely to have successful offspring.

X

Well if you're born with it does that support the selfish gene explanation? After all, anything innate would be genetic?

Part of it is also the result of natural selection / evolution imo.
Communities in which people take advantage of someone else's problems have smaller chances of survival or growth than those in which the members help each other out, or at least don't take advantage.