Posts

Read the First Part

Read the Previous Part

“I think I understand the concept of ‘altruism.'” I said. Then, after a pause, I added, “There are two questions, however, that are causing some confusion in my mind. The first of these relates to something that you said regarding the source of the somewhat universality of experiencing a feeling of joy, peace, and serenity when we act altruistically.” He did not allow me to finish, and said, “You think that is it dogmatic to believe in God and to ascribe these feeling as having been implanted in us by Him?”

“No. My question is different. What I want to know is that if you think that the universality of the feeling of elation when we act altruistically is because of our inherent and ‘Divine’ programming, then do you think that our Creator wants us to be altruistic?” I asked.

“Yes,” he said, “I strongly believe that He does.”

“Then, would I be correct in assuming that you would also believe that God will reward our altruistic acts?” I asked.

“Yes. I think God will reward all our good deeds if we do them with the right intentions.” He answered confidently.

“That is what I thought,” I said triumphantly and continued, “now, my question is, if I were to act altruistically in the hope of being rewarded for it by God, will it mean that I have an ulterior motive and, thus, go against the very spirit of altruism?”

He looked seriously at me and said, “No.”

“But, you said that one has a desire to recognized, appreciated, or rewarded for any of his acts of supporting and helping others, it would amount to an ulterior motive, and an altruistic act should be clear of all ulterior motives. Isn’t that right?” I asked.

“Yes. That is right.” He said, and added, “but an ulterior motive, by its very nature, relates to this desire to be recognized, appreciated, or rewarded by other human beings. You see, the desire to be rewarded, appreciated or recognized by God does not entail the dangers that are entailed in our desire to be rewarded, or appreciated by other human beings.”

“What are these dangers?” I asked.

“When we act righteously to be rewarded, appreciated, or recognized by other human beings, it endangers our integrity. Our lives are then dictated not by any noble principles, but by who might be watching or observing us, at that time. Obviously, there is no such danger of being prone to lack of integrity, when the only reward we seek and hope for, is to please the All-Knowing God, from Whom, nothing is hidden.” He said, and then asked, “Does that make any sense to you?”

“I will need to think about it.” I said and then added, “My second question is why do you consider altruistic acts to be among the most fundamental good behaviors?”

“I hold altruistic acts to contribute toward the rejuvenation of the human spirit, and anything that contributes toward the rejuvenation of the human spirit deserves to be placed among the ‘fundamentally good behaviors’ in my eyes.” He said.

 

January 7, 2020
(Dubai, UAE)

Go to the Next Part

I was attending a meeting with an educational group. One of the members of the group mentioned that they had found an innovative way of punishing those students, who were found guilty of misconduct. He elaborated on his excitement thus: ‘When someone is found guilty of misconduct, he/she has to perform a fixed number of hours in community service.’ I could not hold myself back from interjecting him and said: ‘Community service as a punishment? Don’t you think a person should be subjected to it as a reward for something good that he/she has done, rather than as a punishment?’ Ignoring my question, he said: ‘This point is beyond the scope of this meeting. Secondly, we have had great results from it. We will, therefore, continue doing so.’ And that was the end of the discussion on this point.

I am strictly against the idea of controlling behavior through the Skinnerian or the Behavioral model of Rewards and Punishments. Much has and will be written and said on it. Today, my surprise at this idea of subjecting a perpetrator to mandatory hours of ‘community service’ forced me to write. It needs to be acknowledged at the start that this is not a new idea and may find its roots in the idea of the rehabilitation of criminals.

Without delving into the philosophical aspects of this point of view, there is one aspect that makes one cringe: Do we want to promote ‘community work’ in our young, as a punishment? A punishment, as the current social paradigm holds, is something that a wrongdoer is subjected to, which is considered humiliating and socially degrading. The whole idea can be summed up as follows:

When I have done something wrong, I should be subjected to an act that would make me feel more humiliated and degraded, compared to the pleasure I had gained from my initial ‘wrong’ doing.

Now, think about the whole idea again. Do we want to promote community service in our young as representing humiliation and social degradation? Shouldn’t it, to the contrary, be promoted as representing a special privilege that only the fortunate ones are allowed to undertake? As already mentioned, I am strictly against the behavioral idea of behavior modification, but it was only with this in mind that I had dared to ask: Don’t you think a person should be subjected to it as a reward for something good that he/she has done, rather than as a punishment?

We are so overwhelmed by the Skinnerian school of stimulus and response that we have completely lost sight of the fact that the element of perception that lies between the stimulus and the response plays a pivotal role in the ultimate and the long-term development of the human being in question. It is quite possible to get the desired response from the subject in the short-run (because of our control over the stimulus), yet in the long-run such stimuli, because of misperceptions (or simply different perceptions) on the part of the subject, can sometimes lead to results that are very different from what we had originally desired.

 

December 18, 2019
(Lahore, Pakistan)