Altruism and Helping those in need.

[Nymada del Sol]

I was wondering what people on the forum think about the concept of altruism? Of those who seek to harm as little as possible and help others within their power as much as they can?

I think being a altruist is one of the higher callings in life. In a world where everyone is taught to do for self and not for others, altruism is a school of thought that needs to become more common. One of the convictions I hold is trying to limit the damage I do to others as much as possible. For one I try my best to not take more than I need, when I have too much, I try to share the bounty.

When someone is in need of assistance and I am capable of rendering said assistance, I do it, no questions asked.

I think that altruistic practices would make this world a better place.

Opinions? I'd love to see what people think and feel about this subject.

[torn asunder]

i have a belief system that basically is "always act from a center of positive intent". we can never know what myriad effects our actions can create, and i feel that as long as we act with the intent of creating harmony, peace, and love, or at very least mutual respect, we're on the right path. try to affect change in negative situations when you can, know when to let go of negative people who aren't open/willing to change, and realize when you just don't have the energy to help others without harming yourself. you're no good to anyone broken.

[Nymada del Sol]

That's one lesson I am still learning. I have burned myself out many times helping others and did big harm to myself

[Troy Spiral (13)]

If I have a central goal its a combination of trying to be an honest person, keep my word, search for the truth and find some way to be helpful / useful to mankind in some way. WHY I have that I guess is because it "feels good" to make other people feel better.

The problem is how to do that, because we tend to project our own ideas of what is 'good' onto the rest of the world and have to guess at what that is and how to go about it.

I've spent a TON of time on this subject and the surrounding subjects such as "What is real?" (this is the hardest, and the central one) "Who needs what kind of help?" "What is happiness?" "What is best for mankind?" "what is best for me?" "what is best for <abc> group?" "What can I do realistically?" (Part of my problem with depression right now is my impaired ability to do these things.)

I feel like my intentions are almost always positive, but so often , somehow, they are misinterpreted.

Its a subject that has no easy answer and is as facinating as it is elusive.

[Class-Punk]

I don't "publicize" oneness but I believe in it. In the spirit of the Tao Teh Ching, I think that when you look at excess from a rational standpoint, its has no use; though at the same time I can understand the impulse to collect and I don't necessarily consider that wrong.

I've known people, myself included, to be very neurotic; and reciting the bad parts of their past on a daily basis with vices in excess. If I was their therapist I could see myself basically telling people, 'I don't give a damn about your past.' Just in an attempt to wake them up. I've been on anti-depressants, I'm have my share of scars, and I've lost around 10 teeth, and I'm only 24; I recognize the past but its not my life. So I sometimes consider silence altruistic (no different from anyone teaching meditation) because its always in the present.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

I don't "publicize" oneness but I believe in it. In the spirit of the Tao Teh Ching, I think that when you look at excess from a rational standpoint, its has no use; though at the same time I can understand the impulse to collect and I don't necessarily consider that wrong.

I've known people, myself included, to be very neurotic; and reciting the bad parts of their past on a daily basis with vices in excess. If I was their therapist I could see myself basically telling people, 'I don't give a damn about your past.' Just in an attempt to wake them up. I've been on anti-depressants, I'm have my share of scars, and I've lost around 10 teeth, and I'm only 24; I recognize the past but its not my life. So I sometimes consider silence altruistic (no different from anyone teaching meditation) because its always in the present.

In a sense I think (and have long thought, as I've been interested in eastern philosophic ideas since being a teenager) that the overall theme of "uniity" in most eastern traditions , leads to the idea that concepts such as altruism are "unnecessary" in a sense, that is, if "everything is everything" and there is no (real) separation.

But I think from a life-in=practice standpoint , I want to focus on the endurance of humanity as a specific, separate entity from say, the rest of the animal kingdom, trees and rocks and planets. Which, leads me to a lot of specific actions that would not be compatible with the traditional path to enlightenment/transcendence. It forces us to suffer in ways that are not necessary, but, since I WANT certain things for mankind, its unfortunately something I just have to accept as a consequence of desire, rather than something I really want to remove or transcend (desire). *ponders*

Its an odd stance on my part, that is, that I think "reality" is indifferent/neutral and is all one, but, in practice I choose to , and give (sentient) life a central place and live my life according to this desire to have sentient life "advance in complexity" rather than return to the whole. *ponders*

[Class-Punk]

In a sense I think (and have long thought, as I've been interested in eastern philosophic ideas since being a teenager) that the overall theme of "uniity" in most eastern traditions , leads to the idea that concepts such as altruism are "unnecessary" in a sense, that is, if "everything is everything" and there is no (real) separation.

But I think from a life-in=practice standpoint , I want to focus on the endurance of humanity as a specific, separate entity from say, the rest of the animal kingdom, trees and rocks and planets. Which, leads me to a lot of specific actions that would not be compatible with the traditional path to enlightenment/transcendence. It forces us to suffer in ways that are not necessary, but, since I WANT certain things for mankind, its unfortunately something I just have to accept as a consequence of desire, rather than something I really want to remove or transcend (desire). *ponders*

Its an odd stance on my part, that is, that I think "reality" is indifferent/neutral and is all one, but, in practice I choose to , and give (sentient) life a central place and live my life according to this desire to have sentient life "advance in complexity" rather than return to the whole. *ponders*

I like to think that it is two-sided with the 'absolute' and 'relative', to paraphrase Adyashanti (a modern Zen teacher) on the absolute side everything seems fine as though there's no problems, and yet on the relative side of things, there is still a need for compassion and action; which in a non-dual sense is a paradox but there it is. I'm not at all against complexity, technology, or futurism, but I also consider the bliss that can come out of meditation one of the best forms of therapy; even though I also believe due to its subjective nature nobody will never be able to fully explain it apart from science.

This didn't stop Gopi Krishna or the founder of KAP (Kundalini Awakening Process) to make the attempt at more critical approaches to understanding though these are more rooted in the whole idea of kundalini. The bliss or positive emotions from what I've learned and experienced come out of mental silence/stillness/thoughtlessness, both of which almost seem accidental and impersonal. Being that meditation is the primary reason I'm not a neurotic wreck, I have a strong bias. So I wish more people interest or success in it, not with the intention to push any dogma on them, just wellbeing.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

I like to think that it is two-sided with the 'absolute' and 'relative', to paraphrase Adyashanti (a modern Zen teacher) on the absolute side everything seems fine as though there's no problems, and yet on the relative side of things, there is still a need for compassion and action; which in a non-dual sense is a paradox but there it is. I'm not at all against complexity, technology, or futurism, but I also consider the bliss that can come out of meditation one of the best forms of therapy; even though I also believe due to its subjective nature nobody will never be able to fully explain it apart from science.

This didn't stop Gopi Krishna or the founder of KAP (Kundalini Awakening Process) to make the attempt at more critical approaches to understanding though these are more rooted in the whole idea of kundalini. The bliss or positive emotions from what I've learned and experienced come out of mental silence/stillness/thoughtlessness, both of which almost seem accidental and impersonal. Being that meditation is the primary reason I'm not a neurotic wreck, I have a strong bias. So I wish more people interest or success in it, not with the intention to push any dogma on them, just wellbeing.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said there, just sort of discussing various things.

It the combination of what is actually "good" and even if we could come up with an objective "good" (well-being/flourishing/whatever) how to go about achieving that , that is difficult. We just have to start with some sort of claim, that we "hold to be true" as I think, in the end, there is no "objective good". And having assumed this claim, work out from there as best we can.

Defiantly on board with meditation (of various sorts). I try be careful equating something that has worked for many or worked for me as "is good for mankind" or "is true". For instance I benefit from say, social security, but I try not to extrapolate that out to the idea that it is a net good. It might be, but I try not to make that connection, being such a limited sample size. That is, my main concern, the good of mankind. Not to the extreme that I don't' care about the individual, but I think its "enlightened self interest" to be concerned about mankinds long term survival (rather than just contentment with its state), as its the objectively real social/physical environment that we inhabit.

Mankind being hyper social and adaptable being its key traits, I'd prefer to focus on them, rather than a "retreat" from engagement in that social/adaptable enterprise. (even though i'm a quasi-hermit at times) Many sociologists suggest that the spread of eastern thought was developed a product of and popular because, having to "make due" with its endless subjugation by most of the rest of the world it makes life tolerable and makes a kind of sense in that context (we don't think of say, Christianity as "middle eastern thought" for instance.

I think of things in more of a mix & match way, rather than a single system. Especially when we are discussing things developed by late bronze age (and prior) societies, before an understanding about the basic nature of the universe that has only been available for at most, the last 400 years or so (the start of modern science). I don't think the ancients had any special access to wisdom that we do not have today and even though much of it may be useful. How to separate the wheat ideas from the chaff ideas there, can only be realistically be done by incorporating modern advancements of all sorts. Something I've seen endless reluctance to do in almost every tradition I've followed (despite lip service to the contrary).