Brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve Camray. It's ready. Are you welcome to stuff you should know from how Stuff Works dot Com? You're getting smarter. I am welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark, a staff writer here at how Stuff Works dot Com. With me is Trusty Edit Tricks Candice Gibson. Candice, what are we talking about today? The question is is there such a thing as a truly unselfish act? And what do you think is there? I don't know. I'm sort of on the fence about this one, but one of my favorite sitcoms of all time, Friends had an episode in which they sought to answer the question, and this episode was called the one where Phoebe hates PBS five I remember exactly and um, just to bring up to speed, she had just given birth to her brother's triplets and Joey said that wasn't really an unselfish thing to do because it made her feel so good. So she sets out to find something that is good for someone else but not good for her in any way, and she stumped, and finally she decides to let a bee sting her because it'll help the be look cool in front of his b friends that that didn't work though, right, no, because they be died. So finally, towards the end of the show, she decides that she is going to make a pledge to PBS and Jerry is taking pledges and when he receives Phoebes, he actually gets to be on TV and that does something good for him and the planet is foiled because Phoebe feels great. Yes, so her altruistic act is ruined. No, So, in the span of about what at thirty minutes sitcom, that question couldn't be answered. But there have been some deeper perspectives throughout the centuries. Yeah, and I'm sure you already know this, but what Phoebe and Joey were engaged in is a centuries old philosophical debate. Is there such a thing as a truly unselfish act or an altruistic act? We should probably define that real quick um. Altruism is performing some self sacrificing act for the benefit of another person. Clear enough, I don't think we'd be even having the discussion if that was it. But there's one caveat to that, and which was posed by philosopher Emmanuel Kant who liked to shake things up. Um, and that was that the person performing the unselfish act can't get anything out of it. And we're not just talking about tangible things. We're talking about the intangible warm fuzzy. Sure sure, now, Um, this has already been shown to actually have an effect on us humans, these warm fuzzies you just describe and uh, using MRI machines, we we've seen that by at least donating to charity, the pleasure center, the reward center in our brain sets off a flow of endorphins and we feel just as good giving out money as we do receiving money. Um. So clearly there are warm fuzzies, which kind of supports Kant's idea that there is no such thing as an altruistic act. But so too does evolution. Right. Yeah, So in the Nashville world, there's also a couple of perspectives on dust. And we look at something, um, from the flora side. We have a tree, and when the tree sheds its sleep and fall, essentially what it's doing is it's providing a kitschien of warmth to protect its roots throughout the winter so that it can regenerate again when there's warmer weather. So it's propagating itself for future generations. And you could say the same holds true for a mother who protects her child and in the face of adversity too, she's also trying to protect her lineage. But again, you know, both of these things, the tree and the mother, they get something in return. The tree gets longer life, the mother gets the love and loyalty of her child. Well, let me ask you this. What happens if the mother sees her child in the street about to be hit by an eighteen wheeler, runs out, pushes her child out of the way, and it's hit herself. She's not getting anything out of that, is she? Well, I don't know. I guess at that point you're sort of tapping into religion and storing up good deeds for the afterlife and final judgment, aren't you. I guess. So that's one way to look in might be a question for another day, though, And we have to talk about Josh's favorite philosopher, a meal der Kind. Their kin was here's a pretty heavy fellow. He um he had the impression that altruism was merely a social construct that was used to control people. Um it basically if if we just all went around stabbing one another because we needed money, and rather than just going out and working for it or borrowing it, society would fall apart. Um. To Dirkheim, one of the things we have to have to function as a society is something like altruism, self sacrifice for the greater good. Um. But Dirkheim's view kind of makes us all look a little bit like dopes. Actually, like we're performing on these self sacrificial acts, and under his view, the person who's benefiting from it isn't really benefiting from it. It's really all for society, which is about as depressing a view of altruism as as can be. So clearly, once again, the philosophers, sociologists and evolutionists have really screwed up the warm fuzzies had in there. They really have. They're trying to take the heart out of the issue. But you know, at the end of day, it's all the same. If you do something nice for someone else and you happen to feel good in return, I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. I think I agree with you. Actually, Well, Candice and I are going to go not stab anyone for money, so We'll be performing your own altruistic acts. Be sure to read is there such a thing as a truly unselfish act? On how stuff works dot com For more on this and thousands of other topics. This is how stuff works dot com. Let us know what you think. Send an email to podcast at how stuff works dot com. M brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve camera. It's ready, are you

Brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve Camray. It's ready. Are you welcome to stuff you should know from how Stuff Works dot Com? You're getting smarter. I am welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark, a staff writer here at how Stuff Works dot Com. With me is Trusty Edit Tricks Candice Gibson. Candice, what are we talking about today? The question is is there such a thing as a truly unselfish act? And what do you think is there? I don't know. I'm sort of on the fence about this one, but one of my favorite sitcoms of all time, Friends had an episode in which they sought to answer the question, and this episode was called the one where Phoebe hates PBS five I remember exactly and um, just to bring up to speed, she had just given birth to her brother's triplets and Joey said that wasn't really an unselfish thing to do because it made her feel so good. So she sets out to find something that is good for someone else but not good for her in any way, and she stumped, and finally she decides to let a bee sting her because it'll help the be look cool in front of his b friends that that didn't work though, right, no, because they be died. So finally, towards the end of the show, she decides that she is going to make a pledge to PBS and Jerry is taking pledges and when he receives Phoebes, he actually gets to be on TV and that does something good for him and the planet is foiled because Phoebe feels great. Yes, so her altruistic act is ruined. No, So, in the span of about what at thirty minutes sitcom, that question couldn't be answered. But there have been some deeper perspectives throughout the centuries. Yeah, and I'm sure you already know this, but what Phoebe and Joey were engaged in is a centuries old philosophical debate. Is there such a thing as a truly unselfish act or an altruistic act? We should probably define that real quick um. Altruism is performing some self sacrificing act for the benefit of another person. Clear enough, I don't think we'd be even having the discussion if that was it. But there's one caveat to that, and which was posed by philosopher Emmanuel Kant who liked to shake things up. Um, and that was that the person performing the unselfish act can't get anything out of it. And we're not just talking about tangible things. We're talking about the intangible warm fuzzy. Sure sure, now, Um, this has already been shown to actually have an effect on us humans, these warm fuzzies you just describe and uh, using MRI machines, we we've seen that by at least donating to charity, the pleasure center, the reward center in our brain sets off a flow of endorphins and we feel just as good giving out money as we do receiving money. Um. So clearly there are warm fuzzies, which kind of supports Kant's idea that there is no such thing as an altruistic act. But so too does evolution. Right. Yeah, So in the Nashville world, there's also a couple of perspectives on dust. And we look at something, um, from the flora side. We have a tree, and when the tree sheds its sleep and fall, essentially what it's doing is it's providing a kitschien of warmth to protect its roots throughout the winter so that it can regenerate again when there's warmer weather. So it's propagating itself for future generations. And you could say the same holds true for a mother who protects her child and in the face of adversity too, she's also trying to protect her lineage. But again, you know, both of these things, the tree and the mother, they get something in return. The tree gets longer life, the mother gets the love and loyalty of her child. Well, let me ask you this. What happens if the mother sees her child in the street about to be hit by an eighteen wheeler, runs out, pushes her child out of the way, and it's hit herself. She's not getting anything out of that, is she? Well, I don't know. I guess at that point you're sort of tapping into religion and storing up good deeds for the afterlife and final judgment, aren't you. I guess. So that's one way to look in might be a question for another day, though, And we have to talk about Josh's favorite philosopher, a meal der Kind. Their kin was here's a pretty heavy fellow. He um he had the impression that altruism was merely a social construct that was used to control people. Um it basically if if we just all went around stabbing one another because we needed money, and rather than just going out and working for it or borrowing it, society would fall apart. Um. To Dirkheim, one of the things we have to have to function as a society is something like altruism, self sacrifice for the greater good. Um. But Dirkheim's view kind of makes us all look a little bit like dopes. Actually, like we're performing on these self sacrificial acts, and under his view, the person who's benefiting from it isn't really benefiting from it. It's really all for society, which is about as depressing a view of altruism as as can be. So clearly, once again, the philosophers, sociologists and evolutionists have really screwed up the warm fuzzies had in there. They really have. They're trying to take the heart out of the issue. But you know, at the end of day, it's all the same. If you do something nice for someone else and you happen to feel good in return, I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. I think I agree with you. Actually, Well, Candice and I are going to go not stab anyone for money, so We'll be performing your own altruistic acts. Be sure to read is there such a thing as a truly unselfish act? On how stuff works dot com For more on this and thousands of other topics. This is how stuff works dot com. Let us know what you think. Send an email to podcast at how stuff works dot com. M brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve camera. It's ready, are you