Altruism 1

Is there a scale for Altruism

Julia Dormeyan
6 November 2015

Abstract
Altruism is defined as the motivation to help others out of pure regard for their needs rather than
how the action will benefit oneself . An example of altruism is when someone donates money to

Altruism 2

an organization anonymously without any recognition .What motivated the person to make the
donation is the altruism. It involves doing things simply out of a desire to help, not because you
feel obligated to out of duty, loyalty, or religious reasons. Psychologist believe kin selection
might be a motivation for altruism people may be more altruistic towards those we are
related to because it increases the likelihood that their blood relations will survives and
repopulate . Another suggestion is the neurological motivation. When altruism is performed
the pleasure centers of the brain are activated . Cognitive reasoning and social norms could
also be reasons as to why altruism exist. The pureness of altruism is debated . Is the such
as a thing as true altruism or are there a hidden benefits behind it.

Exposing The Roots Of External Control Psychology: Altruism As Moral Compulsion

Derrick P Nantz describes altruism as, An ethical system that places moral value on
selfless service to others. It is a moral system that promotes collectivism and encourages
dependence as virtue (Nantz, 2015,10). Nantz believes that altruism is responsible for

Altruism 3

external control behavior in society (Nantz ,2015,10). He believes to fulfil the basic human
need of love and belonging we need to reject the unrealistic moral demands of altruism
(Nantz, 2015 ,10). Nantz disagrees with William Glasser who believes we cannot achieve
happiness because of what he calls the external control. Glasser describes external control
as what drives us to manipulate rather than deal with others in a positive ,supportive,
encouraging manner ( Nantz ,2015,10). According to Nantz , External control psychology
was an outgrowth of our culture's widespread acceptance of the morality of altruism
(2015,9). Nantz made sure to distinguish his definition of altruism from its related terms.
Altruism demands self sacrifice as a way of life and makes, that it makes happiness
impossible, Nantz said (2015 ,8).
In Altruism and The Golden Rule Jonathan Goodman explains why he disagrees with
Derek Parfit on his view that reciprocal altruism and related sociobiological theories are
incompatible with the Golden Rule because such theories promote conditioned as opposed
to unconditioned altruism,whereas the Golden Rule teaches us to be suckers (Goodman,
2014,2). If one was to follow the Golden Rule they would help someone regardless of the
person's ability to return the favor , while asa reciprocal altruist would only help those who
are likely to return the favor. According to Goodman ,people act selfishly or altruistically not
because it is right or wrong but because they genetically or culturally conditioned this way
(2014,2). Culture and maybe even evolution has given us certain rules to follow ,we just
happen to call these morals and manners, says Goodman (2014, 3). Goodman believes
there is a possibility of unconscious self interest involved in altruism. If is person believes
he is truly altruistic and behaves accord than others re more likely to believe the actions are
genuine ,said Goodman (2014 ,3). This increases the chances of someone returning the
favor. Goodman presents a hypothetical scenario of two men , Yaroslav who donates

Altruism 4

money to charities, his know about his generosity, keeps his political views private and
makes sure to vote and always tips at restaurants and pays his debt on time . Then there is
Vasili who donates to charity ,is know to be generous among his friends ,only tips at
restaurants he plans on returning back to ,does not vote but makes his political affiliation
known. According to Goodman most people would say Yaroslav was truly altruistic while as
Vasili just wanted to appear that way. The small differences besides the donation to charity
gives us this insight to judge the characters (2014, 4). Goodman say, Our own beliefs tend
to affect whether other perceive us as genuine (2014,4). Goodman groups psychological
and preference into a private sense of altruism and behavioral and reproduction into
public (2014, 7). According to him the problems with the many different definitions of
altruism is no one can truly know what another is thinking when engaging in what are
considered altruistic acts. You cannot know if someone is truly altruistic or is just acting that
way (Goodman,2014,7). We are programmed to make judgements of people out of
necessity , It is best to be associated with those who prove themselves to be truly
altruistic, says Goodman (2014,7). Goodman points out that truly altruistic actions can even
be seen as selfish based on what judgement people pass . Goodman said this is the same
thing with the Golden Rule (Treat others how you would like to be treated) some people
follow it because they believe it is morally right while as others just so they are not
perceived as selfish. Goodman's final point is that how people see you greatly influences
whether you are altruists or not based on their final judgement not your actions because no one

can truly not your motivation.

Stepehen V.Flynn and Linda L.Black conducted a study to Investigate how counselors and
counselors eduactors personally and professionally experienced altruismn and self interest and to
propose an emergent theory of the promotion ,initaion and maintenance of altruism (Flyyn&

Altruism 5

Black,2011,2). They collected data from Self Report Altruism Scale, A focus group, individual
interviews , a topic analysis of 10 precious years of journals articles in counseling, counselor
education, and marriage and family counseling (Flynn & Black,2011, 2). Participants had to
meet a certain criteria to participate in the study such as actively providing counseling services
or counselor education and supervision training or scholarship and were licensed (Flynn &
Black,2011,2). They used three different methods to contact the participants , an e-mail notice
sent to a regional counselor education electronic mailing list to solicit participants for a focus
group, an in-person group invitation, and an in-person or telephone contact based on the
recommendation of another professional. There were 25 participants , seven from focus groups
and 19 from individual interviews. 10 females and 15 males ranging in ages 25 to 79. According
to Flynn and Black the procedures were Potential participants were given informed consent
forms regarding the study's intent and purpose. Additionally, participants were asked to complete
a self-report measure of altruism (i.e., the SRA), engage in an individual interview or a focus
group, and provide artifacts (digital photographs)that represented their professionally based selfinterest and altruism. The SRA served as an advanced organizer that would allow participants to
conceptualize and reflect on their altruism prior to the interview or focus group and served as a
point of triangulation. As a way to protect participant identity and maintain anonymity,
participants were identified by a single letter unrelated to the participant's name (2011,3). Fynn
and Black had measures in place to prevent overly bias ,there had one author wrote his bia
opinions in brackets and after he recorded the interview another author would check it . The
data and the researcher's journal were examined at 3 points, said Flynn and Black (2011,3). the
first author asked participants open-ended questions that evoked a detailed narrative. This
process provided the material for a thick description of distinct, yet related, categories that were

Altruism 6

then distilled into emergent themes. All themes were deliberately written to include nuances of
the themes; subthemes; and, where warranted, pictorial descriptions. To improve the
dependability and confirmability of the findings, the second author conducted an audit to
determine whether the thoughts, procedures, and strategies on particular themes were both
verifiable and dependable (Flynn & Black ,2011 ,3).After this data was analysed , First, data
were analyzed holistically through open coding (Merriam, 1998). Memos were written that
identified the directions, impressions, and thoughts of the first author. Next, the memos were
analyzed in conjunction with the interviews and field notes (Flynn & Black ,2011, 4). All 25
participants completed the SRA, a brief measure of personal altruism. The overall SRA scores
for all participants in the study were between 29 and 66, with a mean of 48.88 and a standard
deviation of 11.61 according to Flynn and Blacks data results . Participants repeatedly
expressed covert values and attitudes within the counseling profession. Covert values were those
unique rules that members of the counseling profession (educators,supervisors, peers) presented
and promoted yet were not prominently communicated in the professional literature .A covert
attitude may represent a meaningful or superficial belief or behavior that was not widely
documented or researched.Five participants noted covert values and attitudes related to
counselors' altruism because they believed that counselors make a quiet difference in the lives of
clients and should not be grandiose about their successes, (Flynn & Black .2011,4).
Participants frequently expressed a richer view of self-interest (i.e., helping myself allows me to
help others) as opposed to narrow vision of self-interest (i.e., helping myself is a purely selfish
endeavor). Participants who proudly accepted their self-interest voiced that they did not
appreciate many of their professional colleagues' misunderstanding of what appropriate selfinterest meant says Flynn and Black.

Altruism 7