Category: Kindness

In her book, The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down, Anne Fadiman explores the experience of a Hmong family struggling through the healthcare system of California. This book can throw light on the challenges faced by these people who have to confront a different socio-cultural environment. This source can be better analyzed with the help of the essay Mother Tongue written by Amy Tan.

This author also discusses the interactions between people who have different cultural and linguistic backgrounds. It is possible to apply such a concept as compassion in order to examine the themes which Anne Fadiman explores in her work. This notion can be defined as the ability of an individual to understand and fill pity for the suffering of another person. To a great extent, this ability is critical for interactions between people who can have different cultural or linguistic backgrounds.

While Anne Fadiman’s this book seems to be primarily related to the impact of linguistic and cultural barriers on the experiences of immigrants, Amy Tan’s essay suggests that their difficulties can be explained primarily by lack of compassion which is essential for the emotional well-being of individuals. This is the main thesis that should be elaborated more closely.

Anne Fadiman’s book is a valuable source that can illustrate the problems which emerge when immigrants have to interact with healthcare professionals. It should be kept in mind that the representatives of foreign cultures often question “the efficiency of Western medical techniques” (Fadiman 23). As a rule, these people “require more time and attention” since the services of an interpreter are needed (Fadiman 25). These are some of the details that should be considered.

This text’s text can be analyzed with help of Ami Tan’s essay Mother Tongue, and this reading indicates that language barriers can significantly impair the experiences of immigrants. This source demonstrates that a person may find it extremely difficult to express his/her thoughts very clearly.

It is usually argued that they speak in “broken or fractured English” (Tan 48). Moreover, it is often assumed that these people think in a primitive way. The author speaks about her mother who also struggled with the language barrier. Many people assumed that “her English reflected the quality of what she had to say” (Tan 48). Thus, one can speak the discrimination against these individuals.

Admittedly, Anne Fadiman also provides numerous examples indicating that linguistic and cultural differences can prevent people from integrating into the society. For instance, the author mentions that medical professionals often have to communicate with teenaged children of patients and discuss such issues as surgery or resuscitation of “a dying family member” (Fadiman 25).

In most cases, such experiences are extremely stressful for family members. Moreover, Anne Fadiman’s book shows that physicians often had “no way of taking a patient’s medical history”; as a result, their choices of treatment could often be questioned (Fadiman 25). Therefore, the emphasis on linguistic barriers is quite justified.

Nevertheless, it is important to remember that this problem is not the only reason why many immigrants can face significant difficulties. In many cases, their hardships can be explained by the inability or unwillingness of many individuals to feel compassion for the problems of others.

In order to illustrate this argument, one should look at the situation described by Amy Tan. In particular, this author mentions that her mother was suspected to have a benign brain tumor (Tan 48). The physicians lost her CAT scan and did not apologize for this mistake.

These people did not consider that she had been very “anxious to know the exact diagnosis” (Tan 49). Nevertheless, they only said that “she had come for nothing” (Tan 49). As a rule, individuals, who are treated in this way, often feel helpless or even desperate. This is why lack of compassion is one of the factors that profoundly affect the experiences of immigrants who are often left to their own devices. This is one of the main arguments that can be put forward.

It is possible to examine Anne Fadiman’s work from this specific perspective. For instance, when Lia was brought to the hospital, she was immediately diagnosed with “early bronchiopneumonia” (Fadiman 26). Yet, the physician did not consider the possibility that her symptoms could be explained by epilepsy (Fadiman 26).

A single conversation with parents could have helped him make the correct diagnosis. However, he did not try to do it. Later, Lia’s parents were asked by to give her certain drugs, and she was almost immediately discharged from hospital (Fadiman 26). Lia’s father was asked to sign the following statement, “I hereby acknowledge receipt of the instructions indicated above” (Fadiman 26).

The physician did not even make sure that parents could fully understand his instructions. This medical worker did not want to make extra effort. So, his indifference is one of the aspects that should be considered. Later, Lia was hospitalized once again, and the physicians made the same misdiagnosis. This is one of the most striking examples that should be considered. Provided that physicians had some compassion for this family, they would have used the services of an interpreter who could speak the Hmong language.

In this way, they could have eliminated the risk of misdiagnosis. Moreover, they might have considered that Lia’s parents felt virtually helpless when they had to deal with healthcare professionals. The main issue is that the physicians were not willing to discuss Lia’s condition with her parents. This is why this child did not receive appropriate medical assistance on time. This is the main problem should not be overlooked by the readers. Admittedly, there were some people who were genuinely willing to help Lia’s parents.

For example, one can mention Dan Murphy who immediately realized how frightened these people had been because they did not know how to help their daughter. Due to his effort, Lia’s parents received at least some support. This example is important for showing how the attitudes of physicians could differ from one another.

To a great extent, these examples suggest that immigrants may face a great number of challenges while trying to integrate into a new community. Certainly, their limited knowledge of English can be the cause of their hardships. However, more attention should be paid to the lack of compassion since this attitude makes their hardships virtually unbearable.

Admittedly, the role of cultural barriers should not be disregarded, but their impact can be mitigated provided that people try to put themselves in the position of one another. One can say that Anne Fadiman is useful for understanding the peculiarities of cross-cultural interactions. In turn, Amy Tan’s essay can throw a new light on the ideas that Anne Fadiman tries to express. These are the main details that should be taken into consideration.

Works Cited

Fadiman, Anne. The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down: A Hmong Child, Her American Doctors, and the Collision of Two Cultures. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2012. Print.

Tan, Amy. “Mother Tongue”. Across Cultures: A Reader for Writers. Ed. Sheena Gillespie and Robert Becker. New York: Longman, 2010. 46-52. Print.

Martinez is a Mexican-American who writes about the current national debate into immigration using the las posadas of Mexican tradition as a metaphor for those North Americans who “turn away” from their sense of humanity. As President Bush advocated the “guest worker” legislation over the Christmas period Martinez cleverly chose a parable that has deep meanings for both North Americans and Mexicans – the narrative of Mary and Joseph seeking refuge and being turned away on the night of Christ’s birth. The choice of parable is apt given the season and that both nations embrace Christianity as part of its social philosophy. A core principle of Christianity is compassion and being there for others.

Similarly to the experiences of Mary and Joseph so long ago, illegal immigrants in the USA are stereotyped as potential “thieves” and socially excluded from the mainstream community. Like many immigrants from Mexico, Mary and Joseph’s story has many present day parallels; not being welcomed by the wider community because of their poverty status (immigrants tend to live in rural areas or on the fringe of townships; Mary and Joseph were not able to find lodging in the town of Bethlehem); sub-standard housing (many immigrants are transient farmers living in make-shift shelters, vans or decrepit housing; Mary and Joseph were relocated to a stable); and poor sanitation and over-crowding (the norm for immigrants is to have extended family groups living together and western houses are not built for families beyond the norm of four to five; Mary and Joseph shared their accommodation with a myriad of barnyard animals).

Martinez also points to the irony of North Americans, most immigrants themselves (i.e., at least those not of Native American heritage) have such hostility toward immigrants. It is self-evident from historical records that North Americans have had a “contradictory relationship” with immigrants which have been ongoing since the colonial days. The USA may promote itself to be the “land of immigrants” with the Statue of Liberty as a shining reminder of what the rhetoric of residency means.

However, citizens continue, in general, to view social others from other nations seeking to immigrate as “them”. There is a dichotomy of social thought that promotes “liberty” (freedom, human rights, community relationships, family safety and personal achievement) on the one hand, and ethnic stereotyping, marginalization, social exclusion, social exploitation in the form of sweatshops and menial work, and media portrayals that are simplistic and aggressive. In the words of Martinez, “We are immigrants who despise immigrants”. It appears to Martinez that the concept of “erasing borders” (opening a door to a stranger) is one that most North Americans want to distance themselves from; which is demonstrated in an attitude that is inhospitable toward illegal immigrants.

Martinez use of the parable urges North Americans opposing equal opportunities and resources for illegal immigrants to consider their moral stance on “hospitality” and their conceptualization of reciprocity. Instead of interpreting the influx of immigrants as being “”thieves” intent on taking from us and giving nothing in return” (p. 1) to find one’s sense of humanity and aid those on their journey toward “a better life” (p. 2).

Ultimately, Martinez questions the logic of decisions such as that of voters in Arizona in November of 2007 who chose to deny public benefits to illegal immigrants when they passed Proposition 200. Basically, Martinez suggests that the North American public drop their paranoiac stance toward immigrants and see their presence as part of a “journey” which involves all people encountered through travels. The hand that is helped today may be the hand that is held out to one in time of need tomorrow.

I think Martinez is quite clever to identify the socio-cultural link to North American psyche by highlighting the analogy of Mary and Joseph’s experiences that night in Bethlehem with the current political debate on immigration which was occurring over the Christmas period. That’s serendipity. He delivers deep insight into the meaning of what it is to be human. Moreover, Martinez asks each North American to consider their moral duty in providing welfare and protection (hospitality) to those in need. The use of parables has been used since times of early civilizations to provide humans with guidelines as to how to live their lives.

We are social beings and as such reciprocity is essential to our existence. Humans survive because we help one another. Survival of the fittest is about social group strength, not individualistic goals grounded in competition. Instead, those of us in positions of power and advantage could look to the true purpose behind illegal immigrant migration into the USA; by what criteria do immigrants define “a better life”?

Personally, I find it highly unlikely that families living in poverty would, en masse, consider immigration from their home to another nation simply to steal and take what they can. Mexican illegal immigrants tend to be farmers and travel along the East Coast and Central territories. Farmers tend to be hard workers, particularly when there is a large family that must be fed and housed and kept in hiding from immigration officials.

People who are living a substance lifestyle are unlikely to take risks that expose them to the authorities and jeopardize the family’s ability to look after one another. More research into the perceptions and attitudes of immigrants would educate the general public as to immigrants’ dreams, aspirations, expectations and concepts of what they have to give and why they wish to make the USA their home. Instead, it appears that North America finds it easier to adopt a “blame the victim” mentality. Using immigrants as the scapegoat for poor employment rates and declining social values constrains the ability for those in power to harness new perspectives on meaning making, and subsequent onward movement of society as a whole.

Random Acts of Kindness Foundation

The purpose of the Random Acts of Kindness Foundation is to promote altruism. The nonprofit organization encourages people to spread kindness in their schools, homes, workplaces, and all aspect of their lives. The website shares inspirational stories about random acts of kindness to inspire others to be thoughtful. It allows individuals to contribute stories about instances where they were either the giver or recipient of care. For those who get inspired by these stories, the website contains ideas for simple actions they can perform to promote compassion. The foundation hopes to impart children with social-emotional learning skills and help make the world a better place.

I found many stories inspirational and was conflicted on which one to pick. After careful consideration, I think the story that influenced me the most was on an initiative called Project Smile AZ. Two brothers started this project to share handwritten cards with COVID-19 patients (Random Acts of Kindness Foundation, n.d.). These cards were meant to provide emotional support to patients who were likely to be lonely in hospital. The project has since then expanded to write letters to homeless people, veterans, cancer patients, and children with disabilities. I found Project Smile AZ heartwarming because of the amount of time and thought that goes into letter writing. Rather than sending cards with prewritten messages, the brothers and the team they have created put effort into writing the cards. I think Project Smile AZ is truly a labor of love.

My Prosocial Day Design

My five acts of kindness all revolved around complimenting people. I implemented the idea in places I visited and on social media. The first act of kindness was complimenting a learner driver on his reverse parking skills. He had the ‘L’ symbol on his car, and I was impressed watching him park into a tight spot without hitting anything. When I went to the grocery store, I told a man that his child was well-behaved. His daughter, who was about five years old, was straightening random items on shelves and greeting the customer service employees. Third, I complimented a waiter for his services and tipped him. On social media, I commended a girl for her articulate post. At the end of the day, I told my friend that I admired his ability to always make everyone laugh. I chose to compliment others because many individuals rarely receive praise. When someone tells me they like a certain thing about me, it makes me happy for the entire day; I thought I would spread this happiness to others.

I received positive reactions from all the people with whom I interacted. The young driver was ecstatic to hear that his parking skills were good, and the father beamed with joy when I praised both him and his daughter. The remaining three also reacted positively, which reinforced my belief that everyone loves to be appreciated. It was incredible watching them blush self-consciously before breaking into smiles. Doing these random acts of kindness also filled me with contentment. Initially, I thought that complimenting others would make them feel good, but I realized that it also made me happy. I became more observant of my surrounding and conscious of people around me, which I think is a good quality to possess. I realized that I had spoken to more than ten strangers at the end of the day. I think focusing on others can help one become less self-centered.

From this exercise, I learned the importance of adopting prosocial behavior. An action does not have to be grand to be benefit others. While my actions were small, they made many individuals happy. For instance, my friend later sent me a text saying that he appreciated the compliment because he had always thought his personality was awkward. According to research, people tend to underestimate the impact of prosocial behavior (Boothby & Bohns, 2021). Some are hesitant to participate in benevolent acts such as donating, helping, and volunteering because they think that their actions will have no benefits. Others believe that complimenting a person makes them uncomfortable (Boothby & Bohns, 2021). While this is true in certain cases, few individuals would react negatively towards receiving words of affirmation. Prosocial behaviors have a reverberating effect, and a simple kind action could impact many more people.

Although I believe in a Higher Being, I would not classify myself as a religious person. Nevertheless, faith plays an important role in my life. I believe in treating others as I would like to be treated. I generally avoid actions that if reversed, would bring me unhappiness. I also think it is important to do things without expecting anything in return. Acts of kindness are unconditional because the doer does not expect reciprocation. Finally, I connected my helping behavior to values such as care, compassion, and courage. It took courage for me to approach random strangers and give my unsolicited opinion. This exercise enabled me to reflect on my principles and think about the kind of impact I make in my day-to-day life.

References

Boothby, E. J., & Bohns, V. K. (2021). Why a simple act of kindness is not as simple as it seems: Underestimating the positive impact of our compliments on others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47(5), 826-840.

Random Acts of Kindness Foundation. (n.d.). Got a pen? Join Project Smile AZ to spread smiles with a handwritten kind note. Web.

Introduction

The problem of people who lost their homes is acute in the US. Devastating hurricanes and state economic policy usually cause it. Therefore, many educated people used to a civilized lifestyle are left homeless. The lockdown caused by COVID-19 exacerbated this situation, leaving thousands of people without work and livelihoods. Therefore, I plan to participate as a volunteer in the distribution of hot meals, when the opportunity presents itself. This experience will help me understand what is happening in our society and enrich me emotionally, inspiring other actions not aimed at satisfying my ego. For example, I can also buy “hanging coffee” to brighten up the day for someone every day.

Main body

We live in a society where selfishness is not condemned and sometimes even encouraged. It is because, in this way, corporations stimulate our consumeristic behavior to gain more profits. However, Aristotle (2000) notes that the kindness shown to others is a virtue, proving that our mental state is in balance. Moreover, according to the philosopher, acts of kindness enrich a person and fill their life with meaning, and therefore are valuable (Aristotle, 2000). Here is a good example: a friend of mine once spontaneously began to take care of homeless pets. Initially, she wrote a report on this topic, in the preparation of which she visited the shelter and was upset to tears about how depressing the life of animals is.

Therefore, she began to buy medicine for animals from the shelter and then took several kittens ‘to overexposure.’ She was happy to do so even though she needed to treat these cute animals from various diseases like tetter, fleas, or injuries. Then she gave them – clean and healthy – ‘to good hands.’ It seems to me that this example illustrates the person’s desire for good deeds, regardless of whether they bring immediate benefits.

Conclusion

According to John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarian theory, actions must be evaluated in the context of their consequences, with even the most brutal actions being justified. I’m afraid I have to disagree with this because some things cannot be changed after we learn about the consequences. For example, in most countries, the death penalty has long been abolished because death cannot be canceled after new circumstances of the case unexpectedly open, and the criminal is excused.

Reference

Aristotle. (2000). Nicomachean ethics. (Irwin, T., Trans., 2nd ed.). Hackett Publishing Company.

The Random Acts of Kindness Foundation allows people to share their good stories and motivate people to do them. The main goal of the movement is to make good and friendly relationships the norm in places like work, home or school (About us, n.d.). Representatives of the website claim that their content is aimed at making people understand how important it is to take care of others (About us, n.d.). It brings a lot of happiness fore society and themselves. Stories are free to access and anyone can share their experiences to teach community how to be socially emotional.

The story that has influenced me the most is called True friends, which is told by a man named Lincoln. The author talks about how, as a child, it was difficult for them to make friends and how lonely it felt (True friends, n.d.). However, later Lincoln made friends with whom they are still friends and occasionally play basketball (True friends, n.d.). The author talks about how friends care about them and always ask if everything is fine when Lincoln looks sad (True friends, n.d.). Thus, this story had a strong impact on me, because the modern world is full of cruelty and falsehood. Finding real friends who will always help is a great happiness and luck. Moreover, many children do not make friends with others for various reasons. As a result, many suffer and it is always nice to see when someone finds support in their friends.

My Prosocial Day: Implementation of Kindness

My day of kindness and compassion was spent in stores where I bought everything I needed to please animals in shelters a little. My basic opinion has always been that man should be responsible for domesticated animals. If someone alone could not do this, then together society is capable of much. There are many shelters in the area and often they need a lot of things, food and toys to keep the animals normal. I made a shopping list and after completing it, I went to one of the shelters to hand over the purchases to its representatives.

I found out about what I need to buy on the website of the shelter, which indicates what is currently lacking for dogs. Moreover, I bought food for volunteers at the shelter, as they work hard and get tired. I helped the shelter, because it seems to me that people and the state allocate insufficient funds and attention to these organizations. Animals cannot take care of themselves and are doomed to a starving life on the street. In addition, they often find themselves in such a position because of the cruelty of people. All these thoughts led me to want to dedicate my day to helping animals. Moreover, I bought food for volunteers at the shelter, as they work hard and get tired.

Reaction

Many people think that some people do good deeds out of vanity and a desire to appear better than they are. I don’t agree with this and helped the animal shelter not out of a search for fame, but compassion. Cages and volunteers will never replace a home with a loving family for animals. The realization of this made me sad and sorry, but when I realized that I could make their life even a little better, I was delighted.

The strongest feelings were pride in myself when I realized how simple and important it is to help those who are weaker. In a moment, I felt absolute happiness and joy that I could make the world a little better. Thanks to this reaction, when others are happy and oneself is happy from this, the desire to help others has become stronger. In addition, it is important to understand that the reaction of others is important and has a strong influence.

The whole family supported the decision to purchase needs for animals and was delighted with my mood and idea. For me, this was vital, because I wanted to share my slavery with my loved ones, and their attitude gave me strength. In addition, I was extremely pleased with the reaction of employees and volunteers when I arrived with purchases. They thanked me for a long time and showed me how they do their job.

Prosocial Behavior

As part of prosocial behavior, people care about the feelings, issues, rights, and well-being of others. My family has always told me to take care of those who are unable to take care of themselves. When I was little, we volunteered with animals and poor people. Thus, from this exercise, I realized that the motivation of people to do good deeds directly depends on what their parents invested in them in childhood.

However, the desire to help others can be cultivated in adulthood. At the shelter, I met enough older people who started volunteering in middle age or after retirement. This is an amazing experience that shows that the desire to do good comes from the depths of the soul. Perhaps it fades into the background with time and people do not have enough strength for something other than themselves or family, but as my experience has shown, people will return to this one day. I do not always have the opportunity to set aside a whole day to help others, but if I succeed, then I feel good and strong, despite the fatigue. Thus, based on this exercise, I believe that the happiness of others makes the world around you brighter.

Faith

Religion has always guided people and helped them to do good deeds. As a Christian, from my childhood I watched helping those in need and participated in many charitable acts. My faith is based on the fact that a person cannot pass by the misfortune of another. The Bible says: “finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous” (Peter 3:8). God calls for people to be good-natured and not leave their neighbors alone with their problems.

My Christian upbringing tells me that people can be cruel. However, if you have a lot of goodness and love inside, helping others is an expression of your attitude towards the Lord. Moreover, Christianity constantly proclaims inner harmony as a necessity. This state is achieved not through worldly entertainment, but by service to the benefit of society. I use faith to not be afraid of being judged or not understanding why I aid others. It gives me strength, even if someone does not agree with my lifestyle. In conclusion, my pro-social day made me feel stronger and more aware of the happiness that comes from helping other people.

References

About us. (n.d.). Random Acts of Kindness Foundation. Web.

King James Bible. (2008). Oxford University Press.

True friends. (n.d.). Random Acts of Kindness Foundation. Web.

Human nature and morals that people possess have been questioned for a long time. It is often debated where feelings of kindness or aggression come from and the biological theme has taken a few attempts to give explanations. The article “Selfless Gene” by Olivia Judson, provides biological bases for altruism and kindness but in fact, it is a mix of both human social cooperation and natural environment.

The study of genetics and DNA has led to some discoveries that help determine which particular biological mechanisms are responsible for the individual characteristics between people. But the reality continues to confirm that the study of social and psychological life can yield better understanding for the reason of why people love or hate.

Altruism is one of the qualities that can be traced to the animal world and baboons and chimpanzees have been closely studied to confirm the findings. It has been shown that cooperation in groups leads to better strength and health of the group and this can be connected to Darwin’s natural selection theory.

It is undoubtedly evident that a group is much stronger than one individual and communication and mutual goals will lead to better and faster results. The article cites Darwin when talking about war and that it might be the cause for people uniting, thus it would be beneficial for them to survive. This point met some opposition, as natural selection was not attributable here.

The general outline of natural selection is that an individual who is strongest will survive and transfer their strong genes to their kin. But it is possible to conclude that in time of war people are even more interested in preserving their genes. No matter how developed people in the past were, they understood that they will not be able to lead a war against a group of people by themselves.

The self-preservation instinct led them to look for people who would cooperate with that individual or several and join into a group of cooperating members. In the end, this would ensure a better chance that their own genes would survive within the protection of the newly formed community. The proposition that people will not join others, who are of different race or background, also seems somewhat limited.

It could have been possible that in the old days, when people did not have evolved communication and language, they would express fear towards other groups of people who seemed different. But it is absolutely clear that in the face of a common danger, a natural disaster or a wild animal attack, they would not take time to conflict with each because the common goal is to save the life from an immediate threat.

The same can be seen in the modern times when people help each other in the face of a more consuming danger. A human being, naturally, realizes that there could be some communication and negotiation with another being of the same kind, whereas communication with flowing lava or an earthquake is impossible.

The modern evolution has given even more support to the fact that people of different races can live in harmony. The anti discrimination laws and human rights movement, have lessened the fear that people might have towards nations that are far away and unknown. Once people realize that the biology and social life of another race is the same, they tend to be more understanding and kind.

All of this leads into the point of altruism and the reasons for it. Biologists explain that being kind and caring to another person starts with relatives and people who are closest. According to the articles, kindness and altruism towards kin is very much understandable because the survival of someone in the family will lead to a greater chance of gene survival. All of this happens on an unconscious level and thus, cannot be analyzed as closely as conscious choice of individuals.

The voluntary decision that a person makes is much better observed and can be examined to determine the true reasons for kindness and help to a stranger. A quite reasonable and logical concept that everyone understands is that kindness will lead to better chances of self survival than a fight. When a person is involved in violence or war, they accept the possibility that there is a chance they might become a casualty. Right away, this understanding greatly decreases the expectance of the survival of one’s genes.

The avoidance of conflict is what will produce better results, even if the person simply pauses to arrange for back-up and members of the family or cooperating group. But even in this case, a violent conflict between two groups will have people realizing that there will be loss of life, which cannot be good for the transference of genes. But another important factor in altruism is that being kind can be traced to a subconscious level as well.

People might deeply believe that the fact that they will help someone, will lead to changes in that person, even if they are not related. People’s genes change not in the process of birth but during life. A person lives their life and the understanding that they acquire produces changes to the genes. This information gets transferred to the next generation. Biologists and scientists take an extreme focus on genetics and the connection between people who are related but evidence shows a different reason.

By helping a stranger, a person becomes somewhat “stronger” and more moral. This adds to their self-esteem which heightens the quality of their life and so, leads to better survival chances. Another major point is that by being altruistic to total strangers, a person creates a memory in that stranger that they were helped. Not only it instills thankful attitude in people globally but there is a chance that the two individuals will meet again, and the person who offered help will be in need themselves and so, the favor will be returned.

This way a person creates friends among strangers and the more this behavior is repeated, the more potential friends there will be. This distinctly points to the fact that people strive to develop positive communication with as many people as possible. This can even be seen in gangs where people with a common belief make one unit, only their common belief is not kindness.

Biology is without a doubt a big part of human behavior and attitude but an equal part is based on social behavior and common good. People understand that by cooperation they will create better chances of survival for themselves and the rest of people, whereas violent competition and wars will only lead to lives and genes lost.

The fundamentals of altruism, personal and professional social responsibility, and codependency

A recent anonymous act of kindness I have performed was donating time to the children from orphanage. In my opinion, it is extremely important to help those, who have no opportunity to satisfy certain primary needs. I suppose that children require more care and love than any other members of our society.

Generally, I would like to point out that it is upbringing, which determines the character of a child. So, when we show attention to children, we increase their chances to be happy.

One may suggest that my act of kindness can be called altruism; simply speaking it is; however, the issue of altruism is not so easy to disclose. There are many contradictions concerning the meaning of the term. The most widespread definition is mostly associated with seeking the welfare of people who need care.

On the other hand, one may suggest that altruism is a selfish act as people do good things and expect that one day the favor will be returned. “In fact, there is some question as to whether human altruism actually exists, or whether what we think of as altruism is actually just enlightened self interest” (Costello, 2002, para. 5).

When speaking about personal social responsibility, one is to keep in mind that the phenomenon identifies personal assumptions, motives, etc. in relation to social issues. Personal social responsibility means a person understands the importance of his or her biases and beliefs.

On the other hand, the kind of responsibility evaluates personal changes in one’s belief concerning some social issues. Such personal changes are evaluated through communication or contact time with other persons, organizations or groups. The phenomenon also demonstrates empathy for the persons through contact time and applies some philosophical theories towards the corresponding issues.

Professional social responsibility is mostly associated with an affirmation that the phenomenon emphasizes performance of codes of ethics and standards of conduct. In other words, professional social responsibility means a person is to be honest, respectful, kind, etc.

“Besides these general obligations that everyone shares, professionals have additional obligations that arise from the responsibilities of their professional work and their relationships with clients, employers, other professionals, and the public” (Loui, 2009, p. 2).

When speaking about codependency, one is to keep in mind that the phenomenon is related to physical and emotional sufferings and the methods of coping with stress. “As adults, codependent people have a greater tendency to form relationships with people who are unreliable, emotionally distant, and dependent” (“Codependency: Caring Until It Hurts,” 2006).

Taking into account the respective roles of altruism, personal and professional social responsibility and codependency, it becomes obvious that the relationships with other individuals, organizations and groups seem to be the most common feature of all the phenomena. In other words, a person’s attitude towards certain issues is determined by social relations and various philosophical aspects the issue includes or is based on.

Altruism and psychological principles

When speaking about the relation of altruism to psychology, it is necessary to state that altruism is considered to be the issue of social psychology. According to various psychological investigations, the most widespread approach to altruism seems to be the egocentric approach.

Sociology, psychology, economics and socio-biology are the sciences the egocentric approach is based on. The good habits people are to acquire, the responsibilities (or the duties) people are to follow and the results of people’s behavior are recognized to be the psychological principles of normative ethics altruism applies to.

The impact of altruism on human condition / the limits to the phenomenon

Generally, it should be pointed out that altruism improves a large-scale cooperation among humans.

Moreover, a culture-based approach towards altruism helps transmit numerous behavioral norms using social sciences. Human altruism reminds us of a strong reciprocity, i.e. “a combination of altruistic rewarding, which is a predisposition to reward others for cooperative, norm-abiding behaviours, and altruistic punishment, which is a propensity to impose sanctions on others for norm violations” (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2003, p. 785).

There are some reproductive limitations to altruism, namely functional, sexual and physical. However, of all the types the most influential were functional limitations, as they “had the strongest effect on altruistic decision-making, indicating that people were less likely to help those who exhibit abnormal social behavior” (Fitzgerald, 2009, p. 234).

Altruism and personal/professional responsibilities

Personal and professional responsibilities, which are related to altruism, include the freedom to make choices, taking responsibility for the choices which were made, taking responsibility for various feelings, ideas and thoughts, looking for the good, appreciating different views (or the opposite views), being respectful of other persons, being aware of the choices, etc.

The conclusion

In my opinion, the future of psychology in relation to altruism seems to be rather ambiguous question. As far as most of the scientists say that altruism is mostly associated with the egocentric issue, I can make a conclusion that the concept of altruism will be changed.

In other words, I suppose that cooperating will become the most important aim of the phenomenon. I can prove this. For instance, nobody will deny the fact that the primary aim of altruism is not to dominate or destroy. In other words, a person will always act in his or her best interests.

So, cooperation seems to be the best policy. I suppose there will be partial humanistic approach towards altruism, but generally, the meaning of the phenomenon will be changed. So, to hide selfishness and aggression (the so-called basic instincts), the society will become more altruistic; however, the hidden aim (to protect genetic interests) will always exist.

Finally, I have to say that the perspectives I described are not awful, but realistic. They are based on inherit nature of human beings. It’s time to tell the truth, don’t you think so?

References

Codependency: Caring Until It Hurts. (2006). Web.

Costello, C. (2002). Altruism: Selfless or Selfish. Web.

Fehr, E. & Fischbacher, U. (2003). The Nature of Human Altruism. Web.

Fitzgerald, C. (2009). Altruism and Reproductive Limitations. Web.

Loui, M. (2009). Ethics and Social Responsibility for Scientists and Engineers. Web.

Altruism is the behavior where an individual feels morally obligated help others even if it is at their own expense. This behavior is a selfless act of concern for the wellbeing of others. Individual who practice this behavior also benefit from it, even though, the benefits may not be seen physically.

According to Maugham, altruism is as much for us as it is for recipients of the kindness. In his opinion, people do selfless things to other people in order to feel pleased with them. This is true because nicest things always happen to people do selfless things (Barber, 2004).

According to Stephen, altruistic emotions and behaviors associate with greater wellbeing, health and longevity. In a recent research, by the University of Miami done on patients with chronic conditions and HIV. Those who joined the support groups to help others lived for long.

When the patients help other patients, they heighten their sense of purpose which reduces their depression levels making them feel virtuous about themselves. This shows altruism is not only beneficial to the recipients of the meritorious deeds but also to the doers of the deeds (Doris, 2010).

According to Schwarzkopf Jr., 0ne cannot help somebody get up a hill without getting nearer to the top themselves. This is the basis of many self-help groups that exist today. It said that when one helps another person the act of helping heals the helper even more than the one helped.

This is so because when one helps another person in solving a problem. The person helping the other one gets to understand more ways of solving the problem than the recipients. Through this the helper also gets an added self-esteem that makes them feel virtuous of themselves.

Being altruistic can have physiological advantage to an individual. Patients with fight flight response are normally at danger of having a weakened body defense. It is a known fact that altruistic emotions and behavior do gain dominance over fear and anxiety that normally initiates the fight flight response.

Through helping others by volunteering in support groups to a condition called helpers high normally emerges in individuals. This causes quick and unspecified physiological changes that turn off the fight flight condition. This shows that the behavior of minding others even if we have serious medical conditions can be just as helpful to us as it is to others (Gilovich et al, 2006).

Altruism as behavior should be instilled in children when they are still young by their guardians, as they say, charity begins at home. When children begin to volunteer at early ages they get enhanced social competence and self-esteem. This also shields them from antisocial behaviors and substance abuse which may lead to early pregnancy resulting in academic failures.

Bringing up children with these teachings can add value to their future lives. Moreover, children brought up in this lifestyle normally end up with better mental and physical health in adult hood than those brought up without this behavior. This only shows to which extent altruism is beneficial to an individual who practices it (Harman, 2010).

The question in many people normally is altruism truly altruistic and does altruism exist. With the current world, there are people who do things in the name of helping others but their main aim is to help themselves. Politicians give out cash donations to the needy so that they can be seen as honorable members of the society, but in the real sense, they are using this behavior as a ladder to achieve their political ambitions. Obviously people will vote for those who are selfless and mindful of others who are in need of help (Nowak, 2011).

According to theory of social exchange all relationships have a give and take even though there is never equilibrium. People normally pretend to be altruistic, but yet they always expect something in return. Being altruistic means being selfless and doing right to others without expecting anything in return.

This theory, however, shows that, with the current world, we live in everything people do has a reason. A man will not buy a lady a car just because he thinks the lady needs a car; obviously the man has some hidden agenda to his generosity. The car may be the easiest way to get to the woman’s heart. This shows that even though the man did a noble thing of buying the lady a car he also expects something like marriage in return (Oakley, 2012).

Additionally, people disguise their hidden ambitions with generosity. This is exceedingly evident in the heroic things that people do for others. In recent times, the main culprits of this behavior are the celebrities and politicians who are out to improve their public image to the public.

They engage in fundraisers and community programs not because they like it but because they need it in their course. For politicians, it is always about publicity and improving their public image. This is so that when the elections come they will remind people of what they did for them when they needed help. This shows that even though they might have been selfless in fighting for the rights of the people, their motivation was never the people’s rights but their own personal ambitions (Scott, 2007).

According to Maugham altruism truly does exist and that people can act out of empathy. This theory is true especially when it means helping at a higher cost. By correctly identifying a person in need, it is possible for anyone to altruistic. Imagine a five year old child stuck in a burning house.

How many people will stand still and watch the child die? Many will try the best way they can save the child from the burning house. When helping the child, remarkably few people will be thinking about the fame and name they will build in case they succeed. The thing on most people’s mind will be the safety of the innocent child’s life. This shows that altruism can truly exist (Post, 2003).

There are many theories about altruism others support its motive as pure others questions the motives behind this behavior. However, all these theories agree that altruism is a beneficial character. Imagine a world where there is no altruism, firefighting jobs would be vacant because nobody is ready to risk their lives in order to save others. In conclusion, it is only wise to deduce that no matter the motive behind these selfless acts altruism will always be beneficial to oneself as it is to the recipients.

References

Barber, N. (2004). Kindness in a cruel world: the evolution of altruism. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books.

Harman, O. S. (2010). The price of altruism: George Price and the search for the origins of kindness. New York: W.W. Norton.

Nowak, M. A., & Highfield, R. (2011). SuperCooperators: altruism, evolution, and why we need each other to succeed. New York: Free Press.

Oakley, B. A. (2012). Pathological altruism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Post, S. G. (2003). Research on altruism & love an annotated bibliography of major studies in psychology, sociology, evolutionary biology, and theology. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press.

Scott, N., & Seglow, J. (2007). Altruism. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

Doris, J. M. (2010). The moral psychology handbook. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Issue Summary

The selfless intention to help others otherwise known as altruism has been a subject of discussion for many social psychologists over the years. In the process, the issue whether true altruism exists or not has attracted both proponents and opponents in the same measure.

In the current issue, Daniel C. Batson and his colleagues propose an experiment in which they show evidence to suggest that people can help others for altruistic reasons in some circumstances.

Here, the proponents argue that empathic feelings play a role in creating altruistic behaviors towards those suffering. In their experiments, Batson and his colleagues hypothesize that the empathic feelings form part of the core motivators of helping, which may be purely altruistic.

The empathy-altruism (model) hypothesis is then tested in an experimental design whereby the researchers propose that a bystander observing a suffering person is bound to react in either of the two ways: by helping or escaping the situation (Batson et al., 1981, pp. 290-302).

Accordingly, the experiment entailed subjects observing a person in pain before choosing either the difficult way (helping the victim by enduring the pain on her behalf) or the easy way (escaping the situation without helping) out of the situation. Further, the researchers utilized a factorial design in which two levels of empathy (high or low) were crossed with two levels of escape (easy or difficult).

Generally, it was expected that the egoistically-motivated bystanders will choose the easy way out while the altruistically-motivated bystanders will be primarily concerned with the welfare of the victim, and thus, they will choose the difficult way.

As a result, the researchers presented evidence to support the empathy-altruistic hypothesis by showing that many subjects showing high empathy participated in helping the victim as opposed to their counterparts with low empathy (Batson et al., 1981).

On the other hand, Robert Cialdini and his colleagues decided to critically analyze Batson and his colleagues’ experimental results particularly those showing elevated helping scores for subjects expected to show high empathy according to the experimental design.

As a result, the opponents claim that empathy is not the only motivation for helping because people can sometimes help others in order to reduce their own distress as opposed to reducing other people’s distress. Furthermore, Cialdini and his colleagues argue that Batson’s experimental results do not conclusively show that pure altruism exists.

Here, Cialdini and his colleagues propose that the empathic orientation shown by the subjects may not necessarily lead to altruistic helping, but it helps to create temporary sadness or sorrow, which will then increase the chances that the subjects will help the victim through the difficult way (Cialdini et al., 1987, pp. 749-758).

As a result, the subjects in Batson and his colleagues’ experiments may have helped the victim out of egoistic reasons.

Therefore, in their experiment, Cialdini and his colleagues sought to separate the feelings of sadness from those of empathy among the subjects in order to assess the reliability of the findings of the former experiments by Batson and others.

As a result, the researchers replicated the earlier experiments by introducing some manipulations such as rewarding the subjects to relief them of the empathy-driven sadness during the experiment.

In the long run, the experimental results in Cialdini and his colleagues’ experiments supported their Negative State Relief Model, which suggests that helping can result from an egoistic interest to manage one’s feelings of sadness (Cialdini et al., 1987).

Evaluations

Batson and his colleagues have demonstrated an in-depth understanding of the issue of altruism in their discussions. From the issue discussions, it is apparent that the researchers understand the need to show the conceptual difference between egoism and altruism in order to suggest a behavioral difference between altruistically-motivated and egoistically-motivated helping.

Furthermore, Batson and his colleagues have shown the empirical ways of determining whether the behavior of helping others is either altruistically- or egoistically-oriented.

Moreover, the experimental design used to address the research question in Batson and his colleagues’ experiments is appropriate and sufficient enough to test their hypothesis. However, the experiments presented by Batson and his colleagues are limited by the fact that confounding factors such as induced sadness during the experiment are not controlled.

Conversely, Cialdini and his colleagues have also presented an equally strong case in which they seek to poke holes into the earlier experiments by Batson and others. The experimental model proposed by the researchers is appropriate and effective in showing other underlying factors that could influence the behavior of helping among the subjects besides empathic feelings.

Furthermore, the manipulations introduced by the researchers to Batson and his colleagues’ experiments are valid in determining other factors contributing to the subjects’ behaviors.

However, from Cialdini and his colleagues’ experiments, one can not determine conclusively whether the subjects’ behavior of helping is either altruistic or egoistic upon controlling for the underlying factors such as sadness. This limitation is apparent upon consideration of the unique nature of individual subjects, time, and other prevailing circumstances.

Overall, the concept presented by Batson and his colleagues is appealing in many aspects. First, the researchers provide a unique way of characterizing human behavior particularly the act of helping.

Secondly, the idea presented by the researchers in determining whether people’s behavior of helping is either altruistic or egoistic is clearly illustrated considering that Batson and his colleagues provide the conceptual and empirical basis of their argument.

However, it is important to factor in Cialdini and his colleagues’ contributions. Here, it is important to note that proper consideration of other confounding factors in Batson and his colleagues’ experiments will make the conclusions provided by the researchers more reliable in future studies.

References

Batson, C.D., Bruce, D.D., Ackerman, T.B., & Birch, K. (1981). Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(2), 290-302.

Cialdini, R.B., Schaller, M., Houlihan, D., Arps, K., Fultz, J., & Beaman, A.L. (1987). Empathy-based helping: Is it selflessly or selfishly motivated? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(4), 749-758.

Written by Barbara Lazear Ascher, On Compassion is a fascinating essay whose time of publication is not well known, though it was revealed in the Elle magazine in 1988. In her works, Ascher dwells much on the issue of compassion. According to her, compassion is that desire or want, to reduce the effect of a painful situation experienced by a person. She posits that compassion is not an innate trait, but comes by learning through the day-to-day experiences.

From her illustrations, the homeless people and in general, people who lack the fundamental requirements, food, shelter, and clothing, serve as what induces compassion, that is portrayed by the society today. However, rich in lessons to the society, criticism chips in, based on her view of the compassion in today’s society. Are all, able and willing to learn and apply this trait, as Ascher puts it? No, is the obvious answer.

Based on her view, she assumes that every person is literate. She is a lawyer, a sign that her level of literacy is quite higher and she able to learn and understand, even by seeing, the situation of other people. She can successfully identify a suffering individual, not only by what she can see or get from him/her, but also by her psychological revelations. This is only limited to the learned, like her, but all cannot fit in this category.

There are, in the midst of her audience, those who see and have interacted with all sorts of afflicted people, but have never offered any sort of assistance. Are they selfish or inhumane? Probably this is not the case. It is only that, they lack the knowledge of compassion, and need to be taught about it, not only through writings like Ascher, but also, orally.

In addition, the issue of homelessness needs clarification. The author gives the illustrations of the two men and the players, as homeless and helpless people, who deserve compassion.

She does not define the conditions of the homeless people. One cannot become dispossessed because he/she has been found on the way and neither can he/she become one simply because he/she is pleading or in rags! Ascher needs to extend her views basing on the current society.

The issue of business is on the peak and people have turned out to be business oriented. Entrepreneurs are everywhere today and as a feature of them, they are risk takers. This implies that they can sacrifice themselves, only to make sure that their businesses grow.

They are willing to spend time on the streets, in pitiful conditions, skipping meals, and pretending to be severely suffering, just to capture the minds of the compassionate people. They end up getting assistance. However, what is at the back of their minds is far from homelessness or hunger as people think, but business. Ascher ought to have clarified this issue.

Compassion is a choice. There is no external force, which can take it out of a person, other than the person him/herself. The author assumes that all are compassionate and are willing to show it off, but this is not the case. The truth of the matter is that all have the trait, but not all can extend it to others.

This is so because the decision to help is individual’s secret, even if the lesson of helping is taught to him/her. She fails to understand that cows can be taken to the river, but cannot be forced to drink the water. It is upon them to decide! She should therefore teach the subject of compassion to the audience and leave them to make their choice, whether to do it or not.

Ascher deserves credit for her works and particularly this essay on compassion. She has given a living example on what people ought to do concerning the issue of compassion in relation to the un- and disabled people. The many assumptions she makes when addressing this fundamental topic, creates the way for criticism, and ought to be clarified to all people before they apply compassion in the real world situations.