THE ALTRUISM ARGUMENT

True altruism exists. 

I have heard it argued that altruism is just another form of self-preservation, an extension of ego. No good act can be truly selfless, as the act itself benefits the giver with its own reciprocal gift. I have been convinced of this argument for a large part of my adult life, but I have been disappointed by its truth for just as long. I have not conceded, however, that this reality should change the act of giving, doing for others, loving, sharing. I prefer a society in which this is the default, and criticize the current one that is too often self-serving alone. 

So as I was hustling to the train in our first serious snow of the season, I was thinking about a parent's decision to do something for their child. I was thinking about how some parents, and I think all parents, sometimes, do things for their children as an extension of their ego, which is truly more self-serving than for their children, but if the child's needs are met, even though this may only be possible for the initial decade or two, even a narsissist, with the right choices, can raise a child. But if the egoist parent can make a better decision, even while self serving, can not another kind of parent act in a the opposite, selfless way? 

For example, if a child needs something that the parent feels they cannot spare, is it selfish, then, to find a way to give it to them, at whatever the cost? If I have to choose between work I am expected to do, and something my child needs, and I find a way to do, at whatever cost that might be to my work life, and by extension me, is this not a selfless act. Other things are at play than ego. Can I not do the right thing for another while sacrificing something from myself? No, you argue, I have now obtained the satisfaction that I have done the right thing. But if I imagine the act of a hero, whose existence is given up for the life of another, is this not selfless. There is no reward. Their sacrifice is complete, and their act is real. They have chosen to give without hope of reward. So if such an act is possible, are not the lesser acts similarly possible to be made without selfishness, in the sense of justice, or fairness? And if this was the first time the act was done, would the reward not yet motivate, but only come after the altruist choice? The fact of satisfaction does not negate the intent, made before the reward.