[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 58 KB, 800x511, 1AC9778D-E508-4F4D-8580-44C812EE9B30.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21626317 No.21626317 [Reply] [Original]

Any good books that critique the altruistic perspective? Preferably philosophical. Traditionalists have a good critique of the humanism that was intertwined with altruism.

>> No.21626334
File: 42 KB, 268x381, Pathological_Altruism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21626334

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathological_Altruism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism#Pathological_altruism

>> No.21626343
File: 26 KB, 258x392, The_Elephant_in_the_Brain.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21626343

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elephant_in_the_Brain

>> No.21626354

AYN RAND
Read her essay for the new intellectual
Or atlus shrugged

>> No.21626356

Objectivism takes that stance so Ayn Rand, I guess. I think Hobbes also proposed some parallel views about self-interest, and other stuff about egoism in general seems to be what your looking for. Stirner and Nietzsche also had some other takes on egoism, so they would be worth reading into if you haven't already.

>> No.21626363

>>21626354
https://nintil.com/why-ayn-rand-is-not-and-ought-not-be-taken-seriously

>> No.21626374

>>21626363
I don't think anyone so far is necessarily calling her philosophy good or worthy of being taken seriously, but it's probably the most straightforward example of an author whose work fits OPs criteria.

>> No.21626399

>>21626343
love this book

>> No.21626403

>>21626363
>and trace to its principal sources everything
>I have never read a piece of work from Ayn Rand, beyond some paragraphs and extracts here and there on the internet. I never gave Objectivism, her system of thought, much importance.
>I haven't read anything from Rand because I consider that the effort won't be worth it, as every time I've read something from Objectivists, I have not been persuaded that there is much to be learned from Rand.
What a massive hack.

>> No.21626405

>>21626354
>>21626356
>>21626363
>>21626374
Thankfully, nobody takes Rand seriously. Stirner's take is infinitely more respectable

>> No.21626452

>>21626403
Yeah honestly how can anyone even expect to take seriously a critique from someone who hasn't even read the work in question. It's infinitely stupid logic. Whoever posted that article is a retard, and whoever linked it here is probably around the same level of retardation.

I don't even like Rand, but, come on, I would expect maybe an ounce of critical thought around here.

>> No.21626456

>>21626403
>>21626452
I've also absorbed enough of Rand's garbage through cultural osmosis to know I don't want to read any of it. What's wrong with that?

>> No.21626458

>>21626343
>Hanson is an associate professor of economics
Dropped right there. Don't much care for satanist rhetoric.

>> No.21626474
File: 1.66 MB, 1280x7779, arguing with zombies.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21626474

Solipsism being true and/or NPCs/P-zombies existing is one possible argument against altruism. If you act altruistically toward someone who isn't sentient, you aren't actually "helping" anyone.

>> No.21626479

>>21626456
Literally just do the bare minimum and read a chunk of For the New Intellectual or something so that you can present a valid critique that goes deeper than just "haha look at these idiot redditors", or just exposing your confirmation bias.

I hate Rand probably as much as you do, but try to at least get a perspective of her views before attempting to shit on them.

>> No.21626492

>>21626474
Neo gnosticism is extremely based, don't hide your hatred for hylics.

>> No.21626527

>>21626317
What you should have a problem with isn't altruism itself but unwarranted and destructive xenophilia.