Is altruism really due to religious sensibility?

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I’ve heard it said (just today in an online debate, actually) that many acts of kindness and generosity result from “religious sensibilities.” And yet, I wonder. After all, I can honestly say that when I see someone in trouble, my first instinct, though I’m a life-long atheist, is to help. And I have tried to do so on many, many occasions. I'm a life-long donor to the Salvation Army, as well as other charities. And by the way, I have many atheist friends of whom I can say the same, and know of many public figures, known atheists, who have been among some of the most altruistic people in history. (Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates, many others.)

So I guess the question I’m raising is this: Do we do “good deeds” because of religion, or do we do good deeds because doing them is a part of our own nature? That is, would we do them if we were religious or not? (And I would love to hear from any member who is willing to say that, if they lost their religion, they would stop doing good for other people.)

And is it not unfair, then, to suggest that religion has any role to play?

It seems to me this is rather akin to the old question – everybody who has ever misplaced their car keys just before an important meeting will understand this – “why is everything always found in the last place we think to look?” Well, the answer is obvious, isn’t it? It’s because once you’ve found them, you stop looking.

Or the old adage that “everything happens in threes!” Well, is that really true? Or do we just stop counting when we get to three, and start again?

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

Discuss

 

[SomeRandom]

It’s often used as a justification. I think altruism stems more from the fact that we’re a social species.

 

[Starlight]

A woman i know is So nice and loving. She is like an Angel. And she is atheist. You can be loving and nice without religious belief. If you are religious or atheist does not matter at all

 

[SalixIncendium]

Another poll where none of the choices reflect my opinion. To save typing a similar post, you can simply read my thoughts on the subject here: Does lack of religion lead to evil behaviour?

 

[Augustus]

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

Discuss

Certain belief systems do seem to promote greater altruism than others, although this altruism may manifest itself in a manner of being willing to fight and die for one's group.

Not all of these belief systems are traditional religions, but differentiation between religious and non-religious belief systems is largely meaningless imo.

 

[stvdv]

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

When you are not altruistic then Religion can be good to learn to "Love thy neighbor as thyself".
IF your memory is good enough THEN you need not read it twice

My Master said "Hurt Never Help Ever" summarizes the Bible

 

[stvdv]

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

Discuss

Does religion result in significantly more altruistic behaviour?

My answer = I don't know
It depends on the person.
For some people their Faith results in more altruistic behavior and for others less (they kill in name of their religion)
For some people their non Faith results in more altruistic behavior (like humanism) and for others less (become materialistic narcissistic only)

 

[Left Coast]

I’ve heard it said (just today in an online debate, actually) that many acts of kindness and generosity result from “religious sensibilities.” And yet, I wonder. After all, I can honestly say that when I see someone in trouble, my first instinct, though I’m a life-long atheist, is to help. And I have tried to do so on many, many occasions. I'm a life-long donor to the Salvation Army, as well as other charities. And by the way, I have many atheist friends of whom I can say the same, and know of many public figures, known atheists, who have been among some of the most altruistic people in history. (Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates, many others.)

So I guess the question I’m raising is this: Do we do “good deeds” because of religion, or do we do good deeds because doing them is a part of our own nature? That is, would we do them if we were religious or not? (And I would love to hear from any member who is willing to say that, if they lost their religion, they would stop doing good for other people.)

And is it not unfair, then, to suggest that religion has any role to play?

It seems to me this is rather akin to the old question – everybody who has ever misplaced their car keys just before an important meeting will understand this – “why is everything always found in the last place we think to look?” Well, the answer is obvious, isn’t it? It’s because once you’ve found them, you stop looking.

Or the old adage that “everything happens in threes!” Well, is that really true? Or do we just stop counting when we get to three, and start again?

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

Discuss

I think the cheese cuts both ways. If we're going to blame the bad things religious people do on the bad teachings of their religions, then it's only fair to equally attribute the good things they do to the good teachings of their religions.

If religion is irrelevant to good deeds, then it's equally irrelevant to bad ones.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Another poll where none of the choices reflect my opinion. To save typing a similar post, you can simply read my thoughts on the subject here: Does lack of religion lead to evil behaviour?

Well, as I read your comments in the other post, it does seem to me that on balance, your answer would seem to lean toward "no." That is why, in this thread, I included the statement (which nobody has yet tried to answer), "And I would love to hear from any member who is willing to say that, if they lost their religion, they would stop doing good for other people."

So, would you try to answer that, and then rethink whether you could vote either yes or no?

 

[Audie]

I think the cheese cuts both ways. If we're going to blame the bad things religious people do on the bad teachings of their religions, then it's only fair to equally attribute the good things they do to the good teachings of their religions.

If religion is irrelevant to good deeds, then it's equally irrelevant to bad ones.

Love that artist who did your avatar

 

[SalixIncendium]

Well, as I read your comments in the other post, it does seem to me that on balance, your answer would seem to lean toward "no." That is why, in this thread, I included the statement (which nobody has yet tried to answer), "And I would love to hear from any member who is willing to say that, if they lost their religion, they would stop doing good for other people."

So, would you try to answer that, and then rethink whether you could vote either yes or no?

It's hard to answer a yes or a no, even more so to that question. It adds another layer of variability. Not only does it depend on the person, but it would also depend on why they lost their religion. People lose religion for various reasons, such as losing faith in divinity, losing faith in a specific deity, losing faith in oneself, or losing faith in humanity, just to name a few.

Personally, I really don't see how it's possible to lose my religion. My worldview has been static for the better part of my life, is evidence based, and adapts to new discoveries. The religion with which I identify follows the same model.

 

[Left Coast]

Love that artist who did your avatar

I honestly don't know! I found it on the interwebs! But thank you.

 

[Audie]

I honestly don't know! I found it on the interwebs! But thank you.

I forget the name but the art is really something

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Personally, I really don't see how it's possible to lose my religion. My worldview has been static for the better part of my life, is evidence based, and adapts to new discoveries. The religion with which I identify follows the same model.

Well, I think the point I'm trying to make is just that -- that we are who we are, and left to our own devices, not much will change us.

So I do not believe that the greedy atheist who "finds God" will suddenly become less greedy. He won't. Nor do I believe that the kindly Christian, were she to lose her faith for some reason, would become less kind. She wouldn't.

My biggest worry is that we humans will, however, change in quite profound ways under the social pressure of our fellows. How many people, for example, do you think would have killed another human -- no matter his colour -- if they hadn't found themselves in a lynch mob? How many schoolboys would have liked to defend the kid being bullied in the schoolyard, but couldn't muster the courage to go against the in group?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And is it not unfair, then, to suggest that religion has any role to play?

It's basically another way for the holier than thou crowd to profess "I'm better than you."

 

[Cooky]

I’ve heard it said (just today in an online debate, actually) that many acts of kindness and generosity result from “religious sensibilities.” And yet, I wonder. After all, I can honestly say that when I see someone in trouble, my first instinct, though I’m a life-long atheist, is to help. And I have tried to do so on many, many occasions. I'm a life-long donor to the Salvation Army, as well as other charities. And by the way, I have many atheist friends of whom I can say the same, and know of many public figures, known atheists, who have been among some of the most altruistic people in history. (Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates, many others.)

So I guess the question I’m raising is this: Do we do “good deeds” because of religion, or do we do good deeds because doing them is a part of our own nature? That is, would we do them if we were religious or not? (And I would love to hear from any member who is willing to say that, if they lost their religion, they would stop doing good for other people.)

And is it not unfair, then, to suggest that religion has any role to play?

It seems to me this is rather akin to the old question – everybody who has ever misplaced their car keys just before an important meeting will understand this – “why is everything always found in the last place we think to look?” Well, the answer is obvious, isn’t it? It’s because once you’ve found them, you stop looking.

Or the old adage that “everything happens in threes!” Well, is that really true? Or do we just stop counting when we get to three, and start again?

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

Discuss

Wow EH, you're on a roll today with some interesting topics!

 

[Cooky]

I’ve heard it said (just today in an online debate, actually) that many acts of kindness and generosity result from “religious sensibilities.” And yet, I wonder. After all, I can honestly say that when I see someone in trouble, my first instinct, though I’m a life-long atheist, is to help. And I have tried to do so on many, many occasions. I'm a life-long donor to the Salvation Army, as well as other charities. And by the way, I have many atheist friends of whom I can say the same, and know of many public figures, known atheists, who have been among some of the most altruistic people in history. (Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates, many others.)

So I guess the question I’m raising is this: Do we do “good deeds” because of religion, or do we do good deeds because doing them is a part of our own nature? That is, would we do them if we were religious or not? (And I would love to hear from any member who is willing to say that, if they lost their religion, they would stop doing good for other people.)

And is it not unfair, then, to suggest that religion has any role to play?

It seems to me this is rather akin to the old question – everybody who has ever misplaced their car keys just before an important meeting will understand this – “why is everything always found in the last place we think to look?” Well, the answer is obvious, isn’t it? It’s because once you’ve found them, you stop looking.

Or the old adage that “everything happens in threes!” Well, is that really true? Or do we just stop counting when we get to three, and start again?

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

Discuss

I think religion has historically been a vessel for good deeds, looking at the model Zoroastrianism started way back when (Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds)... I think people of good will would have found other avenues for this notion had religion never existed, but at the same time, religion can, and has been a popular way of expressing the notion of altruism historically.

...Not sure about the "selflessness" aspect of altruism though... As some religions don't recognize that.

So I put I don't know, because I think it depends on the religion.

 

[Kenny]

I’ve heard it said (just today in an online debate, actually) that many acts of kindness and generosity result from “religious sensibilities.” And yet, I wonder. After all, I can honestly say that when I see someone in trouble, my first instinct, though I’m a life-long atheist, is to help. And I have tried to do so on many, many occasions. I'm a life-long donor to the Salvation Army, as well as other charities. And by the way, I have many atheist friends of whom I can say the same, and know of many public figures, known atheists, who have been among some of the most altruistic people in history. (Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates, many others.)

So I guess the question I’m raising is this: Do we do “good deeds” because of religion, or do we do good deeds because doing them is a part of our own nature? That is, would we do them if we were religious or not? (And I would love to hear from any member who is willing to say that, if they lost their religion, they would stop doing good for other people.)

And is it not unfair, then, to suggest that religion has any role to play?

It seems to me this is rather akin to the old question – everybody who has ever misplaced their car keys just before an important meeting will understand this – “why is everything always found in the last place we think to look?” Well, the answer is obvious, isn’t it? It’s because once you’ve found them, you stop looking.

Or the old adage that “everything happens in threes!” Well, is that really true? Or do we just stop counting when we get to three, and start again?

In other words, is it not really a false attribution to equate religious sensibility with altruistic behaviour?

Discuss

Not that lack of a faith means that they aren't altruistic, but apparently having a faith does influence ones altruistic character.

"Twice as many atheists and agnostics (40%) donated a relatively small amount (under $100), compared to all donating adults (20%)"

American Donor Trends - Barna Group

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"Twice as many atheists and agnostics (40%) donated a relatively small amount (under $100), compared to all donating adults (20%)"

If they had little, then these atheists and agnostics gave more than the wealthiest church organization. That's according to Christ.
But that doesn't tell us how much they have to give. But it does say those with less, predictably, gave less.
And we also know Christians tend to mostly give to their church. Non-theists give more to those outside their own immediate community. In other words, Christians tend to give to their own group and see where their giving goes. Non theists tend to not have that direct link to where they give.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I think the cheese cuts both ways. If we're going to blame the bad things religious people do on the bad teachings of their religions, then it's only fair to equally attribute the good things they do to the good teachings of their religions.

If religion is irrelevant to good deeds, then it's equally irrelevant to bad ones.

Religion doesn't change one's personality or morals, just one's perspective. A crappy atheist will be a crappy Buddhist, Christian, etc. A good atheist will be a good Buddhist, Christian, etc.