Now that all the research has been collected, we can confidently propose a better way to think about this myth. Religious people do not tend to be more altruistic than other people. Contrarily, “the students with high levels of intrinsic religiosity and doctrinal orthodoxy were less likely to help others or volunteer for the community” (Chang-Ho, 2006). Moreover, “intrinsic and orthodox religion foster compassionate and caring beliefs, yet the likelihood of actually helping others decreases as those religious orientations increase” (Chang-Ho, 2006).
How surprising! The explanation that follows:
“One of the popular explanations for moral hypocrisy is “overpowered integrity” (Batson and Thompson, 2001). To this theory, a person sincerely intends to be moral, only to give up this goal when the costs of acting morally become evident” (Chang-Ho, 2006).
Rather than diving into a debate concerning precisely what does – if not religion – foster morality leading to altruism, we shall instead alter the intention of the myth's statement. A more accurate claim would be: Genuinely religious people follow philosophies which can and do motivate altruistic behavior while atheists and agnostics can and do govern their lives by equally altruistic ethical principles of morality. Avoid any categorical comparison between the two in the first place.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
The Paradigm Of Duty
Religion, like many other aspects of human culture, has its fair share of advantages and disadvantages. Well, to be honest, religion is a particularly dangerous aspect of our culture; not because it is wrong – or right – but because of its inherently powerful, authoritative, and influential nature. Religions generally devise a mass scripture instructing how, why, and for whom to live and apply it to millions – sometimes billions – of diverse and unique people. They also tend to wager your life somewhere in there as well, granting you eternal bliss if you unquestioningly oblige or damnation in the fiery pits of hell if you decide to take your own route.
Fortunately, religion as of late has become more invested in ameliorating their hypocrisies, inconsistencies, fallacies, and so forth. Thus, I believe the most important misunderstanding of my myth lays at its heart – an archaic and ludicrously false generalization of religious people – and their opposites. Religious people are not inherently altruistic; but more importantly, ascribing to a religion brings absolutely no statistical bearing on one's altruistic nature. In fact, by definition, religious people acting 'altruistically' in the name of their god, religion, or church are not altruistic at all. Altruism must not have, as a motive, the motivation of duty to something or it is not considered altruism.
Fortunately, religion as of late has become more invested in ameliorating their hypocrisies, inconsistencies, fallacies, and so forth. Thus, I believe the most important misunderstanding of my myth lays at its heart – an archaic and ludicrously false generalization of religious people – and their opposites. Religious people are not inherently altruistic; but more importantly, ascribing to a religion brings absolutely no statistical bearing on one's altruistic nature. In fact, by definition, religious people acting 'altruistically' in the name of their god, religion, or church are not altruistic at all. Altruism must not have, as a motive, the motivation of duty to something or it is not considered altruism.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
An Altruistic Doubt
Maybe I am self-righteous. Maybe I am just a heathen. Maybe, just maybe, I am frightened by the consequences of being wrong.
Religion, polytheism, atheism, agnosticism – these are philosophies by which billions of people over thousands of years have lived, guided, and ended their lives believing. Do I need a reason why I find myself engrossed in such an epic cosmic debate of humanity's beginning and the speculations of our future?
Of course, you are wondering what such a debate has to do with my myth. Well, not much. In fact, according to the research I have collected during this project, religious affiliation has nearly nothing to do with one's altruistic nature. But then, what does?
I chose this myth for two reasons; I find great importance in pursuing a more accurate idea of where I came from, where I am, and where we all may likely be headed. Whether or not some people find religion archaic and outdated, much of human history lays intertwined with humanity's ideas of spirituality and the divine. It is a source of much insight into the psychology of our past.
The second reason is simple; the coercive nature of both religion and human nature captivate me. This myth originally caught my eye because it would require me to look into the deep personal motives that drive actions of an individual that, to others, appear quite the opposite. I began this project quite certain that all human actions were done for the benefit of the individual. So, in other words, I was attracted to this myth because I thought it would uncover to me the phenomenon of altruism – the embodiment of genuine selfless action.
Monday, June 7, 2010
A Short Introduction: An Epidemic
How does the myth religious people tend to be more altruistic than other people survive without substantive evidence in support of it? Myths in culture are often perpetuated by mind traps – or reasoning errors – that fool people into holding questionable beliefs. Here are three of epidemic proportions:
An Epidemic
The false consensus effect causes one's own beliefs, values, and habits to influence his estimates of how widely such views and habits are shared by others (Gilovich, 1991). For example, a person who abstains from consuming illicit drugs may believe the majority of individuals in his school to do the same, while one who often experiments with drugs will be under the impression that most of his classmates do the same. All the while, for the sake of the argument, both may be wrong and the actual statistic is exactly half and half.
Applied directly to my myth, the reasoning error could look like this: “I have known Edward for 20 years and he has always been a nice guy, but ever since he began going to church more regularly he has become so much more selfless! I know he recently received a promotion and now has more money than he could ever spend, but it simply must be the church that is putting him up to all this charity!”
America's population is largely religious, making up something like 75% of the entire population (Wikipedia, 2010). It is no surprise to me that a myth so heavily invested in religious superiority has been preserved in our country. Making up three quarters of the United States, the religious are easily capable of perpetuating this self-serving assessment of themselves. By adopting self-serving beliefs about [themselves] and comforting beliefs about the world, [they allow their personal] motivations to influence their beliefs through the ways they choose a comforting [illusory] pattern from the fabric of available evidence (Gilovich, 1991). Thus, just as a warlord assesses the morality of his line of work and determines his actions justified because he believes war to be necessary and, technically, he is not personally killing any of his victims, but in fact entirely ignoring the magnificently gruesome reality of what he is enabling, religious people assess the morality of their lives and actions as well as the organizations with which they identify themselves. By positively assessing the religions that they adhere to, upholding the notion that religious people tend to be more altruistic than others, and then adopting said notion as a truth for themselves as well, they are able to, I suppose, sleep better at night.
Sources:
Gilovich, T. (1991). How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason In Everyday Life. New York, NY: The Free Press
Religion In The United States. (2010) In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion in the United States
Considering my myth, this reasoning error affects individuals in different ways. For a priest who believes this myth and who in fact lives a truly altruistic life, his estimation of other truly altruistic religious people may be severely skewed. First, he overestimates the religious population and then overestimates the number of those religious people who are actually altruistic. Another consequence of this error arises when applied to a religious individual who inaccurately believes himself to be altruistic. He inaccurately estimates the magnitude of religiously influenced altruism based on his erroneous idea of altruism and his overestimation of religiously-like-minded folks.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc identifies the error of coming to a conclusion based solely on order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might explain a connection (Gilovich, 1991). Concluding that college was the sole cause of a student's attempted suicide only because the suicide attempt occurred after his first quarter of college represents an example of this reasoning error. In reality, the student may have attempted suicide because of the death of a family member, a failed relationship, or long-standing depression.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc identifies the error of coming to a conclusion based solely on order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might explain a connection (Gilovich, 1991). Concluding that college was the sole cause of a student's attempted suicide only because the suicide attempt occurred after his first quarter of college represents an example of this reasoning error. In reality, the student may have attempted suicide because of the death of a family member, a failed relationship, or long-standing depression.
Applied directly to my myth, the reasoning error could look like this: “I have known Edward for 20 years and he has always been a nice guy, but ever since he began going to church more regularly he has become so much more selfless! I know he recently received a promotion and now has more money than he could ever spend, but it simply must be the church that is putting him up to all this charity!”
America's population is largely religious, making up something like 75% of the entire population (Wikipedia, 2010). It is no surprise to me that a myth so heavily invested in religious superiority has been preserved in our country. Making up three quarters of the United States, the religious are easily capable of perpetuating this self-serving assessment of themselves. By adopting self-serving beliefs about [themselves] and comforting beliefs about the world, [they allow their personal] motivations to influence their beliefs through the ways they choose a comforting [illusory] pattern from the fabric of available evidence (Gilovich, 1991). Thus, just as a warlord assesses the morality of his line of work and determines his actions justified because he believes war to be necessary and, technically, he is not personally killing any of his victims, but in fact entirely ignoring the magnificently gruesome reality of what he is enabling, religious people assess the morality of their lives and actions as well as the organizations with which they identify themselves. By positively assessing the religions that they adhere to, upholding the notion that religious people tend to be more altruistic than others, and then adopting said notion as a truth for themselves as well, they are able to, I suppose, sleep better at night.
Sources:
Gilovich, T. (1991). How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason In Everyday Life. New York, NY: The Free Press
Religion In The United States. (2010) In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion in the United States
Religious Icons
Examples of religious altruism in popular culture most often appear via religious icons. Mother Teresa is a favorite symbol of selflessness for religious advocates. Here,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8w81qOc5nU, and here,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa,
one can find inspiring evidence of her altruistic nature. For many, she embodied the Christian spirit. She appeared to have no interest in her own happiness but rather entirely concerned herself with the sick and poor. Lo and behold, there are also wells of evidence supporting a less glorious reality. Here,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WQ0i3nCx60,
and followed by the subsequent videos, a documentary reveals surprising information probably not know by most.
Another religious idol that many people use as support to the inherent altruism of religiousness, Mohandas Gandhi, exemplifies the effective application of social-justice theory.
Another religious idol that many people use as support to the inherent altruism of religiousness, Mohandas Gandhi, exemplifies the effective application of social-justice theory.
By devoting himself to issues of social and political inequality he eventually succeeded in freeing an entire country. He was a powerful religious figure. His philosophy of nonviolence is commonly associated with many religions' image of peacefulness. Interestingly, he was a man of multiple faiths and refused to ascribe to only one religion. In many ways, his life was spiritual but his lasting achievements were secular. For believers and nonbelievers alike, Gandhi provides a powerful source of inspiration for change, passion for good, and faith in humanity.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
People Mean Absence Of Morality
The myth that religious people tend to be more altruistic than other people revolves around the belief that because religious people appear to act frequently out of compassion, love, and selflessness they will commit altruistic acts. Also, the myth gains further fuel from the impression that atheists and agnostics behave more selfishly, ungoverned by divine moral law. In Jean-Paul Sartre's Existentialism and Human Emotions, he describes one of religious people's common accusations towards atheists and identifies the false dichotomy that if one is godless amorality is inevitable.
“...if we reject God's commandments and the eternal verities, there no longer remains anything but pure caprice [impulse, mostly at desire], with everyone permitted to do as he pleases and incapable, from his own point of view, of condemning the points of view and acts of others.”
Furthermore, popular religions such as Christianity and Buddhism emphasize love, compassion, community, peace, meditation, and harmony. These themes can motivate followers towards altruistic behavior. Unfortunately, a staggering majority of those who claim to follow a religion practice their religion immaturely, sciolistically, and superficially. Genuine religion and spirituality must mature throughout life; ceaseless learning, discipline and praxis lay at the core of both. Thus, the myth also suffers from misleading wording because religious people actually tend not to be genuinely religious by any technical definition but rather practice some inauthentic facade in weak accordance with actual scripture and application.
A more accurate claim would be:
Genuinely religious people follow philosophies which can and do motivate altruistic behavior while atheists and agnostics can and do govern their lives by equally altruistic ethical principles of morality.
Avoid any categorical comparison between the two in the first place.
Source:
Sartre, J.P (1957). Existentialism and Human Emotions. New York, NY: Kensington Publishing Corp.
“...if we reject God's commandments and the eternal verities, there no longer remains anything but pure caprice [impulse, mostly at desire], with everyone permitted to do as he pleases and incapable, from his own point of view, of condemning the points of view and acts of others.”
Furthermore, popular religions such as Christianity and Buddhism emphasize love, compassion, community, peace, meditation, and harmony. These themes can motivate followers towards altruistic behavior. Unfortunately, a staggering majority of those who claim to follow a religion practice their religion immaturely, sciolistically, and superficially. Genuine religion and spirituality must mature throughout life; ceaseless learning, discipline and praxis lay at the core of both. Thus, the myth also suffers from misleading wording because religious people actually tend not to be genuinely religious by any technical definition but rather practice some inauthentic facade in weak accordance with actual scripture and application.
A more accurate claim would be:
Genuinely religious people follow philosophies which can and do motivate altruistic behavior while atheists and agnostics can and do govern their lives by equally altruistic ethical principles of morality.
Avoid any categorical comparison between the two in the first place.
Source:
Sartre, J.P (1957). Existentialism and Human Emotions. New York, NY: Kensington Publishing Corp.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)