> Wallace's view of humanity is self-serving and awful. He's a noble savior, the poor people are helpless without their saviors, and everyone else is frightened

> Wallace's view of humanity is self-serving and awful. He's a noble savior, the poor people are helpless without their saviors, and everyone else is frightened, lonely, self-centered, etc. Out of context i guess i could see that reading being something you could conclude. It’s not well supported overall, though. > ... gratitude Sure; but the notion that “do it because it’s the right thing to do, and it’s a good way to say thank you” is not at all at odds with “... and by way of ‘you’re welcome’, you’ll be less of a lonely prick!” It’s kind of an open philosophical question whether or not a purely altruistic act is even possible (where i do X to you, X is good, and I don’t get anything in return that is also good) — why mince words about it? (cf kierkegaard, among many others). There’s no particular shame in acknowledging that charity rewards both parties.