Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas • Hacker News Board

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#61

Post by allendoerfer » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 2:21 PM UTC

jdimov10 wrote: post #50

Tosh108 wrote: post #42

It's interesting that we have such a hard time accepting the emotion of altruism both in humans and animals. The author of the articles states: "could just be revenge". Revenge is in many ways more senseless then altruism for evolutionary purposes (unless you directly attack killer whales that threaten you, but one could argue that that's a form of self-defence), but from our ego perspective it feels more intuitive,…

I don't deny that altruism exists, but to me it's just another form of egoism. Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. Not Mother Theresa, not anyone, ever. Because it's not possible. If you don't put your own interests first, you have nothing to give to others anyway. Moreov…

I think it depends whether you are arguing on a philosophical or on a biological/chemical level. On these low levels we do stuff, because substances in our brain reward us for doing so even if it might hurt ourself in the long run. So I do not believe in true altruism either, which does not mean that people actively have egoistic motives when doing altruistic actions.

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#62

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 2:22 PM UTC

jdimov10 wrote: post #50

Tosh108 wrote: post #42

It's interesting that we have such a hard time accepting the emotion of altruism both in humans and animals. The author of the articles states: "could just be revenge". Revenge is in many ways more senseless then altruism for evolutionary purposes (unless you directly attack killer whales that threaten you, but one could argue that that's a form of self-defence), but from our ego perspective it feels more intuitive,…

I don't deny that altruism exists, but to me it's just another form of egoism. Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. Not Mother Theresa, not anyone, ever. Because it's not possible. If you don't put your own interests first, you have nothing to give to others anyway. Moreov…

[deleted]

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#63

Post by allendoerfer » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 2:24 PM UTC

gozur88 wrote: post #23

knutae wrote: post #18

Humpback whales apparently have to defend their juveniles against hunting orcas. It is surprising that they would defend other species in the same way, but it seems likely to be the same instinct that causes them to protect their own, rather than altruism. Then again, maybe you could make the same claim about humans. :-)

It doesn't necessarily have to be altruism to make sense. Less for orcas to eat --> fewer orcas --> fewer attacks on humpback calves.

If the possess that level of intelligence, we will probably someday find a way to ask them.

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#64

Post by Tosh108 » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 2:31 PM UTC

allendoerfer wrote: post #61

jdimov10 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't deny that altruism exists, but to me it's just another form of egoism. Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. Not Mother Theresa, not anyone, ever. Because it's not possible. If you don't put your own interests first, you have nothing to give to others anyway. Moreov…

I think it depends whether you are arguing on a philosophical or on a biological/chemical level. On these low levels we do stuff, because substances in our brain reward us for doing so even if it might hurt ourself in the long run. So I do not believe in true altruism either, which does not mean that people actively have egoistic motives when doing altruistic actions.

What does believing in an emotion mean? Egotism is arguably no more real then altruism. If your "reward in the brain" statement is correct why is that egotism? If that reward system drives a father to kills himself for his child that's not very egotistic. Why in a biological system would the "self" be preferred above the larger picture? This is definitely not argued in evolutionary theory. In the end it's very much connected to our core motives for doing what we do, and surviving is not always on the top of that list.

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#65

Post by rfrey » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 2:39 PM UTC

jdimov10 wrote: post #50

Tosh108 wrote: post #42

It's interesting that we have such a hard time accepting the emotion of altruism both in humans and animals. The author of the articles states: "could just be revenge". Revenge is in many ways more senseless then altruism for evolutionary purposes (unless you directly attack killer whales that threaten you, but one could argue that that's a form of self-defence), but from our ego perspective it feels more intuitive,…

I don't deny that altruism exists, but to me it's just another form of egoism. Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. Not Mother Theresa, not anyone, ever. Because it's not possible. If you don't put your own interests first, you have nothing to give to others anyway. Moreov…

It seems like this point of view is unassailable because for every example that, in regular understanding, would be selfless behaviour, the definition of self-interest is stretched to encompass it.

- Anonymous philanthropy => feelings of self worth

- Low reward public service (Mother Theresa) => fame and influence

- Parents sacrificing personal good for kids => some kind of evolutionary advantage

- Falling on a grenade => Avoiding survivors guilt

I don't mean to present strawman arguments for these scenarios - if they are silly I apologize. In any case, it seems to me that denial of altruism always ends up stretching the definition of selfish and shrinking the definition of selfless, so that any scenario can fit.

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#66

Post by blubb-fish » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 2:42 PM UTC

jdimov10 wrote: post #50

Tosh108 wrote: post #42

It's interesting that we have such a hard time accepting the emotion of altruism both in humans and animals. The author of the articles states: "could just be revenge". Revenge is in many ways more senseless then altruism for evolutionary purposes (unless you directly attack killer whales that threaten you, but one could argue that that's a form of self-defence), but from our ego perspective it feels more intuitive,…

I don't deny that altruism exists, but to me it's just another form of egoism. Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. Not Mother Theresa, not anyone, ever. Because it's not possible. If you don't put your own interests first, you have nothing to give to others anyway. Moreov…

That says something about you. But in general a lot of people act self-less in favor of a person they love.

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#67

Post by jdimov10 » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 2:54 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #60

jdimov10 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't deny that altruism exists, but to me it's just another form of egoism. Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. Not Mother Theresa, not anyone, ever. Because it's not possible. If you don't put your own interests first, you have nothing to give to others anyway. Moreov…

> Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falling_on_a_grenade

That's called being an idiot. Your government has brainwashed you into thinking of such acts as noble and courageous. They are not. Acts like this do not deserve admiration or respect. Encouraging this in the name of "patriotism" is beyond despicable.

But to get back to the point, as an individual, the only reason you would do something like this is because you feel better knowing that you have sacrificed your life to save other people's lives. Because, presumably, you couldn't live with yourself if you didn't. So if that's your way of dealing with the situation - that's fine, I guess. I still think you're an egoist for doing it.

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#68

Post by steveax » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 3:03 PM UTC

mrob wrote: post #3

There's an interesting video of a humpback whale being freed from a net: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcXU7G6zhjU We don't know for sure if it really is showing appreciation at the end, but humpback whales are social animals so IMO it's plausible. It certainly makes a big effort at breaching despite being trapped for a long time and despite there being no other whales nearby. Why would it do that if it's not tryin…

That's an amazing vid.

There's also a radiolab episode with an account of divers rescuing a humpback whale from a net:

http://www.radiolab.org/story/91701-animal-minds/

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#69

Post by allendoerfer » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 3:08 PM UTC

Tosh108 wrote: post #64

allendoerfer wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it depends whether you are arguing on a philosophical or on a biological/chemical level. On these low levels we do stuff, because substances in our brain reward us for doing so even if it might hurt ourself in the long run. So I do not believe in true altruism either, which does not mean that people actively have egoistic motives when doing altruistic actions.

What does believing in an emotion mean? Egotism is arguably no more real then altruism. If your "reward in the brain" statement is correct why is that egotism? If that reward system drives a father to kills himself for his child that's not very egotistic. Why in a biological system would the "self" be preferred above the larger picture? This is definitely not argued in evolutionary theory. In the end it's very much c…

I don't believe that people do altruistic things, because on a biological level we do stuff, because we like the feeling in our brain, therefore we do it for ourself, which is egotistic.

Truly altruistic would be something we just do without any benefit for ourself. I just argued that this only exists on a philosophical level, not on a biological level, so I don't believe in the concept unless we agree to treat the brain as a blackbox.

Re: Humpback whales around the globe are mysteriously rescuing animals from orcas

#70

Post by jdmichal » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 3:14 PM UTC

jdimov10 wrote: post #50

Tosh108 wrote: post #42

It's interesting that we have such a hard time accepting the emotion of altruism both in humans and animals. The author of the articles states: "could just be revenge". Revenge is in many ways more senseless then altruism for evolutionary purposes (unless you directly attack killer whales that threaten you, but one could argue that that's a form of self-defence), but from our ego perspective it feels more intuitive,…

I don't deny that altruism exists, but to me it's just another form of egoism. Nobody can convince me that they have ever done anything for ANY other reason than because of the belief that it will be good for them or that they'll get some sort of kick out of it. Not Mother Theresa, not anyone, ever. Because it's not possible. If you don't put your own interests first, you have nothing to give to others anyway. Moreov…

What's your definition of altruism? I let a guy behind me at the grocery check-out in front. He had one item and I had an entire belt full, and the express lines (for low item counts) were all closed. Why? Because I know that situation sucks, and it's what I would have wanted to happen for myself. Does that make it egoist? I don't know. I never expect to see that person again; I never expect anything to result from that transaction other than my leaving the store a minute later than I could have.