Question for you regarding Altruism

Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago to Philosophy
184 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

We've had a totally voluntary military for about 40 years now.
The ultimate altruistic act would be to willingly give one's life for others.
We've had several periods of conflict over those 40 years.

How do Objectivists view those who volunteer for the military? Especially the Army and Marines who have been the brunt of the casualties in the past 40 years.

Isn't volunteering for something that might result in the ultimate sacrifice, one's own life, for the benefit of others, the ultimate form of altruism?

Should those who volunteer for the military be admired, or vilified?

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 6.
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And I thank you for your service.

    The part of your statement that causes me confusion is the "cost of a few years of your life for something you love and believe in."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It my be in your self interest because it is the only way to pay for college. It might not be in someone else's self interest because they are working on PhD or an invention or starting a business.

    It might be in my best interest to buy a certain car, let's say a Honda civic because I am single and because I commute 50 miles a day. That does not mean that it is in your best interest to buy a civic, if you have four kids and have to take them to school.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Perhaps. Few things are solely black/white and most issues have numerous inputs. But in this regard, one has to say that the potential of giving one's life as a soldier is higher than as a civilian and to do so voluntarily would seem to be an altruistic act. Does the reason for doing so matter? If I do it for the money does that make a difference than if I do it for "love of country?" Why would the motivation cause a difference if the objectively observable action/consequence is the same? Isn't that a fundamental tenet of Objectivism?

    Funny how the usual crowd has been quiet on this topic.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Correct, altruism is no longer an issue. But if one person can observe a set of facts and come to one conclusion, and another observing the same facts comes to another conclusion, how is that A=A?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    begging the question.

    Do you consider yourself an Objectivist? (I am not)

    If you do, then I've seen numerous others make the case of vilifying MT and just want to get your take.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Requiring service is conscription which tosses out Altruism as a factor.

    Whether the conscript feels altruistic or not is moot, since no choice is given.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 10 years, 11 months ago
    For all vets posting in here....Thank you for your service.

    Perhaps Altruism could be considered an "unintended consequence" of serving in the military
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 10 years, 11 months ago
    Um...

    I volunteered both to give back to our country for what it had given me, and to change my life, and the potential tradeoff that I could become injured or killed was part of the fair exchange of value for value. Anyone who walks in not realizing that (ESPECIALLY nowdays) has their head in the clouds.

    For me (and most people who served) it's not even an altruistic thing - it's a chance to get something, in this case maturity, training, and leadership qualities (and for the "o" ranks excellent management experience as well) for the cost of a few years of your life for something you love and believe in.

    That's why most of us vets are not liked by the current dotgov... because we took that oath, and too it seriously. And *that* scares those people - that we made a promise, not to the Fuehrer but to the Nation and the Constitution, and have the backbone to keep it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Perhaps a different question should be asked...

    Why should service in the military trigger either type of regard purely based on that fact without any other information on that individual?

    We are more than our associations past or present.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I didn't accuse you of shouting me down. But it happens enough that I'll choose my interactions on such more judiciously. Since you are not a paid member, we have no way to conduct such interchange privately.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And I thank you for your service. I was Army myself.

    OK. Take all of what you said, and apply it to Mother Theresa. I've seen Objectivists vilify her, yet I cannot see anything that you have described being any different for her serving the poor.

    Do you see a difference?

    If so, how do you rectify such difference?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by conscious1978 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    As evidenced by many of the replies, the personal motivation for service depends on the individual. There are not _necessarily_ contradictions. Secondary consequences of an individual's action do not _necessarily_ equal their primary motivation.

    If someone dies in voluntary defense of their ideas and values, and it saves countless others as a secondary consequence, there is no contradiction. That person didn't die in the fight "for them", that person died in a fight for what they thought was personally important.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    For me, it was patriotism, education, employment. 2 of 3 for sure were self-interest, but the first was not. Altruism?

    And speak to any soldier, particularly those who were actually in combat. They will tell you that their motivation was almost exclusively collectivist (I fight for the guy in the other foxhole, and he fights for me).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Now you know one of the biggest reasons I struggle some with Objectivism. One can be non-contradictory and "live for another" in this way, but being Objectivist???
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Even policing isn't at the same level of hazard as the military. I've known police officers who never had to pull a weapon on duty. The military is intentionally meant to kill people and break things.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thanks for your response. I also volunteered, out of a sense of duty to contribute to a nation that was providing for me, for the education and for a guaranteed job. Coming from formative years in the 70's, I had a concern about employment opportunities (who'd a thunk that the '80's were going to be such a boom time?).

    I would not have volunteered for war, but would not have hesitated in the least if that were the assignment.

    As it was, "peace" broke out in the '90's and military advancement slowed WAY down. Not a place for someone with aspiration. One of the reasons that the sr leadership isn't the best right now - the best got out and those with little competence/drive stayed behind (just my biased opinion, clearly).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    So, from your comment am I to believe that you advocate anyone who has such deadly contagious disease should be segregated and left to die on their own? Please elaborate.

    And even if she did subject herself to possible harm, how is that different from a soldier? Both do what they do in service to others.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo