5 ms·

I think that the vast majority of people (narcissist or not) will never do something unless they personally benefit from it in some way. Everything that people

I think that the vast majority of people (narcissist or not) will never do something unless they personally benefit from it in some way. Everything that people do is for themselves. Even when people give money to charity; they do it because it makes them feel good. I think that maybe the difference between a narcissist and an altruist is that a narcissist doesn't derive any positive emotions from helping others.

fao_ 8y ago
> I think that the vast majority of people (narcissist or not) will never do something unless they personally benefit from it in some way. I tend to disagree, and would recommend that you read https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/
- jondubois 8y ago
  I think that the the evolutionary argument strengthens my point. The positive emotions that someone feels could be a chemical adaptation devised by certain genes precisely to help the survival of similar genes across specimen boundaries. So genes trick the individual into helping another individual who shares certain specific genes (genes related to altruism itself). Narcissism could be a predatory evolutionary strategy which works by fooling altruistic genes within other specimens into thinking that they're the same. That would explain why narcissists are often described as 'charming' - It's all about giving an facade of altruism without incurring any costs for the specimen. Even the most altruistic people don't usually want to help convicted criminals.
fzeroracer 8y ago
I disagree, I personally believe it's possible for people to be altruistic entirely for the sake of altruism. Making themselves feel good is secondary to the altruistic action. And I think that's what differs between a narcissistic action and an altruistic one. Narcissists absolutely can and do derive positive emotions from helping others, but it's either entirely to help their own self-worth and/or achieve a certain goal, like the example in the article of helping an old lady accross the street. An altruistic action is done for the sake of helping someone first, with the positive reinforcement as a potential bonus. A narcissistic one is done for the sake of positive reinforcement with helping others as a side effect.
- jondubois 8y ago
  You may not realize it consciously, but writing this comment probably made you feel (at least slightly) good about yourself. Not consciously realizing that helping others feels good doesn't mean that you're more of an altruist.
MarsAscendant 8y ago
Oh, but bullshit. Comparing altruism to narcissism is so entirely self-centered, it fails to encompass the sheer idea of the fact that people do things for other people that bear no benefit to themselves. And don't even start the whole "But you feel good about it" line. Do I feel accomplished from writing a supportive message? Not particularly. I wrote it because I saw it a good thing to do, because I'm that kind of a person. I'd keep doing it even if I'm going to be dismissed or disparaged half the time. The kind of reductive argumentation you express, at best, prevent proper self-actualization – and at worst, prevents its development in the first place.
- krageon 8y ago
  The thought that self-development leads to altruism and that questioning the source of said altruism (and it's potentially selfish roots, I make no claim about that here) is reductive (or perhaps even a bit ridiculous, if you'll allow me to read between the lines) doesn't seem to me to be something that is really a given. The only real arguments you've given to counter this are that it's bullshit and that you're just that kind of person. Not terribly convincing in any real sense, if that is what you were going for.
  - MarsAscendant 8y ago
    I wasn't aiming to convince anyone. Sometimes, I find calling something out as bullshit important enough to speak up, even if I have nothing else. For what it's worth, I'm not buying that altruism is just another conduit for the good feels. It can be frustrating, it can be exhausting, it can seem pointless at times because you seemingly make no difference, and it can make you give up for a while. Don't get me wrong: I'm not denying that altruism is about the person committed to it, to some degree. What I'm denying is that it's about some kind of personal gain, in the same way narcissistic supply is. There's this idea of projects of immortality that people commit to in their lives, to escape physical death by becoming culturally immortal through the change they'd effected. Ernest Becker wrote about it in his book, The Denial of Death. The higher purpose, the meaning of life... We're all very much about that – self-actualization – as long as we don't have to just survive. I find it difficult to accept that this kind of effect is entirely selfish and is based entirely in self-satisfaction. > The thought that self-development leads to altruism I've never claimed that. What I did claim is that one may be dissatisfied with the prospect of helping others out of a natural impulse if they're convinced it's selfish – and, therefore, promoting altruism as selfish is a negative consequence, rather than a matter of self-knowledge, as the parent commenter seemed to have posited. It's "reductive" in a sense that it reduces a complex, interconnected system of personality to a basic matter of whether we feel good about something. It makes things seem far simpler than they are. If it were that simple, psychotherapy wouldn't need to exist.

fao_ 8y ago

> I think that the vast majority of people (narcissist or not) will never do something unless they personally benefit from it in some way. I tend to disagree, and would recommend that you read https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/

jondubois 8y ago
I think that the the evolutionary argument strengthens my point. The positive emotions that someone feels could be a chemical adaptation devised by certain genes precisely to help the survival of similar genes across specimen boundaries. So genes trick the individual into helping another individual who shares certain specific genes (genes related to altruism itself). Narcissism could be a predatory evolutionary strategy which works by fooling altruistic genes within other specimens into thinking that they're the same. That would explain why narcissists are often described as 'charming' - It's all about giving an facade of altruism without incurring any costs for the specimen. Even the most altruistic people don't usually want to help convicted criminals.

fzeroracer 8y ago

I disagree, I personally believe it's possible for people to be altruistic entirely for the sake of altruism. Making themselves feel good is secondary to the altruistic action. And I think that's what differs between a narcissistic action and an altruistic one. Narcissists absolutely can and do derive positive emotions from helping others, but it's either entirely to help their own self-worth and/or achieve a certain goal, like the example in the article of helping an old lady accross the street. An altruistic action is done for the sake of helping someone first, with the positive reinforcement as a potential bonus. A narcissistic one is done for the sake of positive reinforcement with helping others as a side effect.

jondubois 8y ago
You may not realize it consciously, but writing this comment probably made you feel (at least slightly) good about yourself. Not consciously realizing that helping others feels good doesn't mean that you're more of an altruist.

MarsAscendant 8y ago

Oh, but bullshit. Comparing altruism to narcissism is so entirely self-centered, it fails to encompass the sheer idea of the fact that people do things for other people that bear no benefit to themselves. And don't even start the whole "But you feel good about it" line. Do I feel accomplished from writing a supportive message? Not particularly. I wrote it because I saw it a good thing to do, because I'm that kind of a person. I'd keep doing it even if I'm going to be dismissed or disparaged half the time. The kind of reductive argumentation you express, at best, prevent proper self-actualization – and at worst, prevents its development in the first place.

krageon 8y ago
The thought that self-development leads to altruism and that questioning the source of said altruism (and it's potentially selfish roots, I make no claim about that here) is reductive (or perhaps even a bit ridiculous, if you'll allow me to read between the lines) doesn't seem to me to be something that is really a given. The only real arguments you've given to counter this are that it's bullshit and that you're just that kind of person. Not terribly convincing in any real sense, if that is what you were going for.
- MarsAscendant 8y ago
  I wasn't aiming to convince anyone. Sometimes, I find calling something out as bullshit important enough to speak up, even if I have nothing else. For what it's worth, I'm not buying that altruism is just another conduit for the good feels. It can be frustrating, it can be exhausting, it can seem pointless at times because you seemingly make no difference, and it can make you give up for a while. Don't get me wrong: I'm not denying that altruism is about the person committed to it, to some degree. What I'm denying is that it's about some kind of personal gain, in the same way narcissistic supply is. There's this idea of projects of immortality that people commit to in their lives, to escape physical death by becoming culturally immortal through the change they'd effected. Ernest Becker wrote about it in his book, The Denial of Death. The higher purpose, the meaning of life... We're all very much about that – self-actualization – as long as we don't have to just survive. I find it difficult to accept that this kind of effect is entirely selfish and is based entirely in self-satisfaction. > The thought that self-development leads to altruism I've never claimed that. What I did claim is that one may be dissatisfied with the prospect of helping others out of a natural impulse if they're convinced it's selfish – and, therefore, promoting altruism as selfish is a negative consequence, rather than a matter of self-knowledge, as the parent commenter seemed to have posited. It's "reductive" in a sense that it reduces a complex, interconnected system of personality to a basic matter of whether we feel good about something. It makes things seem far simpler than they are. If it were that simple, psychotherapy wouldn't need to exist.