ASEBL Journal – Volume 13 Issue 1, January 201 8
ary, functional trend or effect. In some cases the mean can be golden, but in other cas-
es the common is vulgar. One of the most fascinating things about our species, and at
least as fascinating to an evolutionary biologist as to anyone else, is that we humans,
not any science, decide what we are to consider good, what that means, and whether
we will pursue it.
▬
The Importance of Practical Understanding for Altruistic Behavior
Jonathan R. Goodman
Abstract
In this paper I present a revised view of altruistic behavior, whereby neither intention,
nor effect, nor their combination, is sufficient for distinguishing altruistic behavior.
On this view, a behavior is altruistic to the extent that it signals an intention to benefit
another at a cost to oneself, irrespective of actual intention or effect. This understand-
ing yields interesting but sometimes counterintuitive implications; for instance, a par-
ticular behavior intended to be altruistic that has a positive effect on the intended re-
cipient is not necessarily altruistic. One of the features of this view is that a practical
understanding of the nuances of particular social circumstances is a necessary criteri-
on for acting altruistically; this is shown with examples of gift-giving intended to be
generous that fail to qualify as altruistic on this conception. Two corollaries of this
view of altruism are proposed: first, an altruistic signal is designed to elicit costly be-
havior from recipients and observers; second, honestly altruistic signaling is more
likely to benefit the agent than deceitful signaling.
I.
Introduction
In this paper I propose a revisionist view that altruistic behavior should be understood
as a signal designed to elicit beliefs and costs from others. While the accepted defini-
tions in philosophy and biology provide sufficient criteria for a behavior qualifying as
altruistic within these respective fields, neither explains how and why agents are per-
ceived to be altruistic in any possible circumstance.
Altruism, sometimes defined in ordinary language as “selfless concern for others,”
requires, on this view, that a person intends to help others without ulterior motive, for
example by making an anonymous donation to a poor person or group the giver does
not know. Yet it is unclear what the sufficient criteria are for behaving altruistically:
one can intend to be altruistic and do nothing, one can misunderstand the etiquette in a
particular culture, and so forth.
In biology, on the other hand, where the sufficient criterion for altruism is benefiting
another individual at a genetic cost to oneself – for example by foregoing a meal so
that someone unrelated to one can eat – it’s possible to intend to hurt others and to
inadvertently help them, and yet for that action to qualify as altruistic.
10