Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

theswaddle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 159 posts

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#141

Post by ameminator »

wolverine876 wrote: post #118
ameminator wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't sympathize with your viewpoint. Lots of research shows that it's hard to go against your natural state. You only have so much willpower - for most people it's a finite resource. In that context, your comment reads "Why don't you just decide to be better?". Do you think that the original commenter wanted to be this way? That it was a deliberate choice? Do you think it's that easy to change right now? I…

> Lots of research shows that it's hard to go against your natural state. How do you define 'natural state'? For example, my natural state is to be attracted to food when I'm hungry, to certain humans who I find sexually appealing, etc., but I don't grab those things when they pass by; it's not hard. My natural state is to be angry or upset when my client says certain things, but I don't punch them or cry. My natural…

Look, I understand what you're saying. But I don't mean "learning math", I was referring to a fundamental aspect of someone's personality. If a person is impulsive, then it is hard to become "not impulsive".

If a person has angry tendencies, then it is a struggle to handle that anger. Often people need help (ie. a therapist) to deal with these.

It is my experience that you can't tell someone to "turn your empathy into a superpower" the same way you can't tell them to "turn your anger into a superpower" - it just isn't that easy, takes time and effort.

Yes, it can be done, but success looks more like "I managed my anger so I can live a happier life" instead of "I channeled my anger and became a boxing champion". Think "I managed my empathy and set healthy boundaries". What would 'success' even look like in this context?

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#142

Post by TameAntelope »

lightredelephnt wrote: post #124
TameAntelope wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think assuming how people feel and what people are thinking without asking them, giving them agency, is nearly the very pinnacle of arrogance. further, this can be some of the most damaging behavior you participate in on a daily basis, both to you and to the person you do it to. I cannot overstate how toxic to your relationships and to yourself this behavior is. You need to let people express themselves, and listen…

You are right that assuming you completely understand another person’s mind can cause (serious) problems in your relationship with them. But people also “tell you how they feel” with more than just words. So it’s not as simple as “ignore everything but the spoken or written word”.

My point is you need to let people express themselves, rather than assuming their emotional state from body language or other subtle cues.

People often decide how to feel, and we need to let them.

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#143

Post by JetAlone »

supertofu wrote: post #78
white_dragon88 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically don’t be a schmuck. Common sense should dictate one’s practice well.

I don't understand your response. It's very common for empathetic people to feel great suffering. It's not "common sense" knowledge to learn how to maintain deep compassion while preventing the pain from affecting your own being. In fact, most highly empathetic people, like OP, feel burdened by this emotional state because the untrained person experiences compassion as double suffering (the suffering of the object of…

The understanding I've gained as an Orthodox Christian is that God works in us, using the suffering to help us repent. He prepares us for resurrection unto life. This justifies the suffering, gives it enough meaning to keep going. When we have this conviction of compassion and do not run away from it, but shoulder it as a responsibility and work through it to find the truth and serve within it to the best of our ability we are living out what it is to be the long-suffering servant.

I am grateful to you for pointing out this etymology. I find it to be beautiful because in compassion I can be suffering with Christ. So, thank you.

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#144

Post by JetAlone »

a_t48 wrote: post #139
goodpoint wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The backlash you are getting only proves the point :-/

Funny that people don't respond well to being generalized as untrustable.

Right? Especially when they still yet have an entire Imperium to push social pressure on the rest of us through.

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#145

Post by wolverine876 »

maroonblazer wrote: post #140
wolverine876 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lots of research shows that it's hard to go against your natural state. How do you define 'natural state'? For example, my natural state is to be attracted to food when I'm hungry, to certain humans who I find sexually appealing, etc., but I don't grab those things when they pass by; it's not hard. My natural state is to be angry or upset when my client says certain things, but I don't punch them or cry. My natural…

You're cherry picking the easy cases. Of course, most people can muster the strength to choose to pass on the desert or the tryst. I think the parent is referring to the hard cases, where, only in retrospect, you have the clarity to see that you made the wrong choice and wish you'd done otherwise. But of course you can't. And if you rewound the universe to the exact same starting conditions you still couldn't.

> I think the parent is referring to the hard cases

You only know what's 'hard' after you try to change them.

> But of course you can't. And if you rewound the universe to the exact same starting conditions you still couldn't.

That's too fatalistic. You can and do, but it's indeed hard.

I reject the idea that, to express an extreme case, we are powerless automatons of our worst instincts. We have free will and choices, just not always easy ones; we can change, but sometimes it takes a lot of work. People HN believe their startup can change the world and embrace all the hard work and mountains to climb; we have a much better chance of changing ourselves.

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#146

Post by unrealp »

Trasmatta wrote: post #2

Having a higher than average amount of empathy seems to be a disadvantage in many ways. It seems in many cases to be correlated with anxiety and depression. It can be difficult for people with high levels of empathy to recognize the boundaries between their own self and the thoughts and feelings of others. As a kid I was highly empathetic, and it's something I've struggled with my entire life. It never really felt li…

i have gone through similar situation and i too might have spd and never been diagnosed. all that you say here resonates with me. for me other things are okay, but "I don't have a self or personality of my own" is something of a fundamental problem for me. because of this, when i interact with anyone, i tend to adjust to how they are. if i interact individually with person A and then individually with person B, the most confusing part is interacting with A and B together. confusing for people i mean and people think, oh this is not how you are. not able to dance and disconnection from body is another sad thing. i am 41 now and with time i think i have improved. i share more with people and care less about what people think of me. i hope it will improve for you.

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#147

Post by nonrandomstring »

wolverine876 wrote: post #136
HWR_14 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This struck a cord. Can I get you to elaborate?

Here is what I understand. I have no expertise, I have long studied and learned to apply these ideas, after trying the willpower approach for much of my life. Most of all, I encourage you to read what experts say; it's fundamental psychology (even if I denied it for a long time). I have plenty of flaws but I am blessed with willpower, at a level that drives others crazy; I am always pushing the furthest, always the l…

Well said. Reminds me of that Lowe/Cash song "The Beast in me". Need to care for your inner wild animal. You might like Bowlby (attachment), particularly with regard to how formative parent relations affect you later.

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#148

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

wolverine876 wrote: post #125
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being vague as all get out is really on brand for advice from the Dao De Ching.

If you notice, much philosophy - generally defined, including religion - is vague. Much great art is vague. It may turn out that, unlike technical manuals, there is no value in spelling out everything. Either the reader engages or not and if they do, they don't need it spelled out - they create it in their own neural pathways, in their own mind, which is far more valuable than reading it. And if they don't, it doesn'…

I'd argue that you're conflating philosophy and religion, and that unlike what you're suggesting by that conflation, much of philosophy isn't vague - it's careful and well thought out. Here's a random passage from Decarte's Meditations:

I have always considered that the two questions respecting God and the Soul were the chief of those that ought to be demonstrated by philosophical rather than theological argument. For although it is quite enough for us faithful ones to accept by means of faith the fact that the human soul does not perish with the body, and that God exists, it certainly does not seem possible ever to persuade infidels of any religion, indeed, we may almost say, of any moral virtue, unless, to begin with, we prove these two facts by means of the natural reason.

What about this is vague? He's clearly laying out his goals and how he intends to do it. If you want to say that religion, as a particulary subset of philosophical thought, is often vague, then sure, but a lot of philosophy is very intentional and focused. It's setting out a goal and working towards achieving said goal, not trying to write in a manner that will appeal to everyone.

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#149

Post by dang »

cletus wrote: post #16

Quoted post unavailable.

What? You can't post nationalistic slurs to HN and I'm shocked that a user with your history here would sink to that.

No more of this on HN, please, ever. You can make your substantive points about corporate practices and whatnot without talking about how an entire nation of people shouldn't be trusted.

This is really basic stuff and applies regardless of which country anyone has a problem with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Altruism under stress: cortisol negatively predicts charitable giving

#150

Post by flatuencer »

TameAntelope wrote: post #142
lightredelephnt wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right that assuming you completely understand another person’s mind can cause (serious) problems in your relationship with them. But people also “tell you how they feel” with more than just words. So it’s not as simple as “ignore everything but the spoken or written word”.

My point is you need to let people express themselves, rather than assuming their emotional state from body language or other subtle cues. People often decide how to feel, and we need to let them.

How you react to something is just as important as how you say you feel after the fact. People do judge and form opinions on your behavior as well as your thoughts. Wishing it was otherwise is the real arrogance in this scenario.

I'm all for letting people figure out how they feel about things, but sometimes we don't have the luxury of time and we need to interpret in the moment. This will happen no matter what as long as we have a biological form, and pretending otherwise serves no one.

Post reply on HN