Eungi+Choi+(Altruism)

Our social behavior is programmed accorded to evolution in which we express gene-protecting nature. We protect ourselves (for we can produce offsprings), protect our children, protect close relatives, and lastly protect those of the same locality (and maybe complete strangers at the end). The young come before the old, family members before friends, and neighbours before strangers. "The biological nature of selfishnes is entirely concentrated on the protection of ones' own genes." For example, a mother would sacrifice herself to the predator in order to save her three offsprings because she would have saved three times her own genes (each offspring inherits their mother's genes).
 * 1. Are we, as some might say, motivated by a desire to save our off-spring?**

According to the online article, the writiers state that altruism is just an illusion that masks our inner pleasures. Good social behavior gives off pleasant neurochemicals, we consciously/unconsciously want to be seen as a good person from others (surface-altruism), and we want to feel good about ourselves (motive-altruism). To me, this is quite a vague argument just like the argument on whether everyone are controlled by fate or not. If we did not have an intrinsic reward, then would we still perform those tasks? It's all a matter of point of view because for people who do not believe in altruism, they would probably answer that it's impossible for all forces that control these actions are due to one's selfishness while people who do believe in altruism would say yes.
 * 2. Must there always be some sort of intrinsic reward for doing good?**


 * 3. Mr. Otis once said, "That having integrity is doing the right thing when no one is watching." If this is so, and no one knows when we have done good, would you still do good?**

With an audience to give social reward, the person would have a higher chance of performing a good deed, but without such an audience, the percentage would be low. In this point of view, doing good deeds without people watching you would probably seem like a good deed for it's not for the attention that the person gets but for the oh so good of the world or something. However, this isn't the right answer. Even if you pick up the trash without an audience, you would still feel a highness because of the internal intrinsic reward one receives. Whenever we do something good, pleasant neurochemicals are released into the brain and we often get addicted to this feeling. It's not for the good of others, but it's for the good of oneself that the person does the job.

According to Trivers (1971), a delayed reciprocal altruism is the factor in which animals return favours to others so that in the future, the same treatment would be given to them. This is considered a gamble because there is no certainty that the same treatment would be returned. Of course, a person would feel guilty if they had received a present from others, but it doesn't mean that the person is forced by their emotions to buy the other a present also. Delayed reciprocal altruism isn't a set fact because there are too many variables that interrupt it. The emotions of people isn't something that can be controlled. (Although not returning the benefactor is considered quite selfish)
 * 4. "Delayed reciprocal altruism", seems like a gamble - back to game theory, any way. Does this seem to make sense to you. That is that we act out of a desire to have what we have done being done to us?**

According to the online article, the answer would be no. Every good act that we perform, whether there is an audience or not and whether it's for the good of others or for personal enjoyment, all our actions are controlled by our inner selfishness. With an audience, we get the social reward. Without an audience, we get neurochemical rewards and the feeling of power (It also deals with evolution). There is no such thing as altruism or selflessness because everything we do is consciously/unconsciously programmed beforehand. The word altruism just makes the actions seem good while it makes the person feel good inside. Motives and rewards control everything we do.
 * 5. Are we ever being truly "selfless" when committing an act of altruism?**