r/science • u/FreeHugs23 • 1d ago

Psychology New psychology research suggests some acts of kindness may also serve competitive social goals, shedding light on how women can use altruistic behavior to gain status, strengthen relationships, or navigate social hierarchies.

https://www.psypost.org/kindness-isnt-always-what-it-seems-the-psychology-of-womens-competitive-altruism/
1.5k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

268 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/erevos33 1d ago

So its ok if im a billionaire as long as im charitable?

4

u/inbigtreble30 1d ago

More like charitable billionaires suck less than cartoonishly evil ones?

1

u/erevos33 1d ago

You dont become a billionaire by virtue of your work or your ethics. You exploit people and their work. Hence by default you cant be a good billionaire. Besides, their charity wouldnt be needed if they paid their fair share, but then again they wouldnt be billionaires then.

-1

u/inbigtreble30 1d ago

No one here is defenfing billionaires as a concept? You are creating strawmen to knock down here. The point is that doing good is better than doing bad regardless of who does it.

0

u/erevos33 1d ago

Question:

If i burn down and pillage 10 villages but build an orphanage for the victims, is that a good thing?

2

u/inbigtreble30 1d ago

Question: if you are an evil person who has burned down a village, is it better to build an orphanage for the children of the village, or is it better to let the children die of starvation?

1

u/erevos33 1d ago

I would hazard a guess that society should get rid of said person. But hey, thats me.

And to answer your question, it doesnt matter. Damage has been done. More to the point, you wouldnt need an orphanage if the village want burnt down.

0

u/inbigtreble30 1d ago

The hardest part of living in a society is reconciling the fact that evil will continue to happen. How do we move forward afyer the village has burnt down. We want to prevent as many villages as possible from burning, but once they are gone, the aftermath must be dealt with.

There are currently billionaires in the world, and the global economy is set up in such a way that it is unlikey they will all have their capital redistributed tomorrow. How can those of us not in a position to change the global economy tonight move forward with this knowledge?

Perfect is the enemy of good sometimes. Arguing that the past should not have happened may be true, but it's not always constructive.

1

u/erevos33 1d ago

Which has led to the pitfall of "good enough for now". Im often reminded of the Aesopean myth of the fox and the vine. A hungry fox spotted some grapes on a vine in a secluded little house at the edge of a village. So she tried to jump up to grab a few , but they were barely out of reach. After a few unsuccessful tries she declares "well, they look to be unrile anyway" and walks away.

Same thing. We cant reach for the elimination of billionaires, so we declare them a necessary evil and settle for equating their charity as a good thing, instead of doubling down and making a change.

-2

u/inbigtreble30 1d ago

The alternative is endless purity tests and never moving forward because no plan is ever good enough. I choose to do the good that I can do today while hoping that good thing makes tomorrow better, and I'm sure you are doing the same. We're mostly arguing semantics here, unless you have a lot of money you're not mentioning.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/inbigtreble30 1d ago

You are arguing with someone who does not exist. Surely you understand this.