Does Being Kind Mean You are Closer to Evolving?

Well.....does it?


There are alot of people that will say that being selfish, is the equivalent of just plain being human. Self preservation is built into our genes...and so forth.

There is a particular saying: "Dont mistake my kindness for weakness". I have always thought this to be a silly statement/threat. Why would the two get mixed up?

Why is kindness looked at as submission?

Personally, I have always thought that it takes much more out of a person to be kind. To give. To help. It it is even harder, to be kind without thinking about it.

Honestly, you probably pat yourself on the back at least a tiny bit when you do something kind or helpful.

But is being kind an example of evoloution?

Well, lets define evolving.

1. to come forth gradually into being; develop; undergo evolution

2. to develop by a process of evolution to a different adaptive state or condition

So, to progress..we must learn. To learn we must experience. Then, we must adapt.

I think we can all agree that being selfish has gotten us NOWHERE as a species. Unity is what will get things done. Our governments are selfish, our politicians, our leaders, our stars/celebrities....and even the common "Joe". Most of us are selfish to some degree, even the ones who follow religions that teach the OPPOSITE.

But what if by rejecting our "natural" selfish nature, it is helping us evolve?

Dacher Keltner seems to have a few ideas about this:

In contrast to "every man for himself" interpretations of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection, Dacher Keltner, a UC Berkeley psychologist and author of "Born to be Good: The Science of a Meaningful Life," and his fellow social scientists are building the case that humans are successful as a species precisely because of our nurturing, altruistic and compassionate traits.

Survival of the Kindness? You betcha!

Keltner's team is looking into how the human capacity to care and cooperate is wired into particular regions of the brain and nervous system. One recent study found compelling evidence that many of us are genetically predisposed to be empathetic.
Informally known as the "cuddle hormone," oxytocin is secreted into the bloodstream and the brain, where it promotes social interaction, nurturing and romantic love, among other functions.

"The tendency to be more empathetic may be influenced by a single gene," Rodrigues said.

So one gene may effect what will one day be a large part of your personality!

Source Material


The more generous we are, the more respect and influence we demand
Basically, the article goes on to say alot more about the social standpoint also. People who are giving, and kind, generate more personal respect. In fact, I would go as far as to say that being a pleasant and generous person, will get you respect alot quicker than being physically dominant. Just because you can "beat someone up", doesnt mean that you demand respect. Being kind...at least in my opinion, does.

"The findings suggest that anyone who acts only in his or her narrow self-interest will be shunned, disrespected, even hated," Willer said. "But those who behave generously with others are held in high esteem by their peers and thus rise in status."

So why arent we more kind and generous?? Seems like the best route to take!!
Because gratifying ourselves feels just as good. Some would even say better. But when you seek out something, based upon your own needs alone...you only make yourself happy.

If you make it a point to do something for someone else, then that empathy...that positivity, spreads. Your actions influence other actions. Next thing you know, you have a ripple effect of positive influence that can travel very far!!


You opening the door for a struggling mother with her stroller, could esily transfer to a chain of events that prevents someone else's death on the other side of the world.

Sympathy is our greatest instinct, ATS friends. Do YOU use your instincts?

Aggression and selfishness is a base instinct reaction, whereas a passive and nurturing aspect of humanity is a unique trait. I am not sure what passes as kind, especially when there are things to be gained from being kind (but I guess that type of kindness is arguably just advanced selfishness).

Cool info.

The misconception stems from the fact that 'selfishness' as an evolutionary behavioural adaption to survive, simply does not apply to a self aware being which can reason and make choices.
More particularly, It no longer applies to modern people since we now dont adapt to our enviroment, but rather adapt our enviroment to us.
It dosent even work as a social tool.
Continue to be nice!

[edit on 4-3-2010 by wayaboveitall]

reply to post by SaturnFX


In my opinion, doing something kind in order to recieve something is just being selfish in a round about way.

I think true kindness, is when you do something and expect nothing at all in return.

Our genes are selfish, but we are not. It does not automatically follow that a gene which mindlessly and selfishly satisfies it's own replication would create a creature which is similarly selfish. Richard Dawkins, who came up with the concept of the selfish gene, has spoken on this subject quite a bit.

Well, I read through the OP and I will have to counter with a study done at Harvard.

Here you go, the intent of the thread originally was to evaluate this study but it devolved into something quite different, so here goes-

Grumpy people are more advanced on the evolutionary scale!

It got bumped to the BTS, so you may want to login there.

reply to post by endisnighe




There were some REALLY funny replies, there!


In all seriousness though, which do YOU find more gratifying?

Originally posted by InertiaZero
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

In my opinion, doing something kind in order to recieve something is just being selfish in a round about way.

I think true kindness, is when you do something and expect nothing at all in return.

Yet even those seemingly selfless actions, you feel better about yourself, which is what you more than likely were questing for to begin with, which makes it once again a selfish action.

Selfishness with a positive outcome, I feel, is fine and ultimately what we should quest for...however selfishness that also inflicts damage to another person is a degenerative aspect of civilization.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Thats an interesting way to look at it.

So how do you think we get to the point of kindness being second nature? Not just a select few of us.

Example:
I certainly dont think about the selfish things that I do, however my judgement is rewarded by myself when I do something kind.

How do we train ourselves to do vice-versa?

Originally posted by InertiaZero
How do we train ourselves to do vice-versa?

By surrounding yourself with like minds. It's contagious, you know.

reply to post by SaturnFX


there is something called being true, which is being aware that is why kindness is of awareness not of genes

truth as i repeat it is the abstraction of positive certainty drives existance and its objective infinite life translations realities

being true is simply being presently witnessing you as positive drive, it is the awareness of you being positive drive entity

that is why humans can act kind as meaning nihilism or objective intelligence or simply freedom from everything else

it is very important to see how objective intelligence is never related to positive entity free drives

understanding this is allowing truth to be the life of objective intelligence realities, and that positive drive that each one is the awareness of would be like in its domain freedom life

OMG I just realized that I am a Neanderthal
Ugg

Actually, I think being kind is a just like any other learned thing. It must be positively reinforced.

Negative reinforcement, in my view, does not reinforce anything at all, it just gives another layer to a person's perceptions of their reality.

To further kindness, is a very noble thing. Like I said, you would need to positively reinforce the action though.

An episode of X files comes to mind on this subject, Mulder wishes for Peace on Earth from a Djinn. No one left on Earth was the outcome.

Anyway, I think it may also be part of the genetic code.

Too many variables for someone like me to get to the bottom of it.

reply to post by InertiaZero


As a species that can wipe us off the map in 20 minutes, we have to get our priorities in line. For most of human history, being agressive has had certain survival advantages. Today we have the knowledge for any physics graduate to build an a-bomb. Many of us myself included could build fearsome biological weapons. In the 1980's the Russians developed and mass produced a most veralint strain of weaponized anthrax. It was as close to 100% lethal as you could get. Not even the great killers of ages past, smallpox and the black death, killed more of 30% of the population. They had enough anthrax to kill the entire human population hundreds of times. I don't know the current status of the Russian bilogical weapons programs. I just pray they have grown up a bit since then.

The idea that kindness, compassion and the extent of what dignity you can offer someone, is critical at this stage of human development. I think one hope we have is we are starting to see the development of a plantary mind. (I'm not talking about the borg here). But individuals that offer their voice to Earths great chorus. I have a nasty terndancy to worry a lot. When looking at our own civilization and what we worry about, I look to ancient cultures of the past. I try to predict what we will do based on what they did. Perhaps the best example, (at least one very close to our time), was what caused the fall of the Roman empire.
Most ideas I have heard in this area are reasonable, but incomplete. (!: The Roman nobility had kitchen items made of lead. It's also quite true that when you combine gobblits made of lead and alcohol, you will get lead poisoning. I assure you.

Between 300 and 400 CE, sorry I can't recall a precise date, the empore Justinian was about to go into battle. Above him, in the sky he saw a flaming cross. (I think today we would call it a UFO). He knew what the cross was, a symbol of what had been a forbidden religion. And he said, "get me out of this mess, and I will make Rome Christian". He was good to his word, he did. He won the battle, with unusually light effort. I don't think God had anything to do with that, I think it was his military skills which were very advanced for there day. Far be it for me to stand between a man and his divine inspiration, what ever that might be.

And then some real poop hit the fan. From 500 to 600 ce, the empire utterly fell apart. SOP is the barbarian tribes got a grip on Rome and her outer regions. And yet for 500 years Rome had held off those tribes. What changed? We don't see any change in barbarian military tactics for at least 500 years. The Romans came up with bigger and better tricks. So why did Rome fall? I think because at that vulnerable period in time Rome became Christian. They started to question their society, and their own lives. That made them vunerable. Every government fears more then anything else the lack of confidence of its population.

Now were at another precipace today. We need to question everything. I think the next stage of human development will involve the hard questions. Human compassion is very powerfull, and can go a long way in helping all of us. The Romans were a brutal society, and in time it had to fall. Perhaps our society will last, if we get our priorities right. The greatest danger we face is what all cultures befor us faced. They thought they were immortal.

There was a re-run of an old "Friends" episode I watched in which Phoebe and Joey made a bet on whether there could be an act of kindness in which there were no secondary gains made to the person performing the act of kindness. Phoebe was determined she could accomplish this, but eventually "her good feelings" about what she had done, ruled out a selfless act, so they decided it couldn't be done.

I really don't think the secondary gains are what kindness is about. I meet some real characters in my daily life, sometimes people who have committed heinous crimes. Some folks have no charming qualities whatsoever, and are difficult to even like, much less love.

But, sometimes I think of a sermon I heard by a minister, who was discussing charity. He suggested that being kind to persons who have committed dispicable acts (taking a cup of coffee to a serial rapist) is actually an act of charity. We are not required to love them. Whether or not we feel good about ourselves afterwards is irrelevant.

What is relevant, is the act itself.

reply to post by wayaboveitall


No species ever stops adapting to their environment. That would assume that there is a goal to evolution, which is impossible. All of our technology would not be possible if we did not learn to adapt to our environment. Things like the physics are all part of our environment and as we learn more about the laws that govern the universe we are able to create better technology, which in turn leads to a longer lifespan and better health. People claim that our technology removes us from evolution, but our technology is an adaptation to our environment, which in turn leads to fitter organisms.

What the topic of this thread is describing is known as The Golden Rule, do onto others as you would want them to do onto you. Yes, it's better to give than to receive and acts of kindness should be sincere and not have any strings attached. By following these rules I would agree with the OP that there is an element of evolvement, but I think we evolve spiritually more than we do physically.
I want to say this should be the case in a civilized society but clearly it's not. What's even sadder is if the SHTF and we are forced to fend for ourselves, Mr Nice Guy will devolve or become extinct altogether.

[edit on 4-3-2010 by Alxandro]

Originally posted by Signals

Originally posted by InertiaZero
How do we train ourselves to do vice-versa?

By surrounding yourself with like minds. It's contagious, you know.

I agree with you but still you need to be careful because some people might consider that a form of segregation.
I think people learn from other people and by isolating a certain group of outcasts , they will never learn or understand these acts of kindness.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by wayaboveitall

 

No species ever stops adapting to their environment. That would assume that there is a goal to evolution, which is impossible. All of our technology would not be possible if we did not learn to adapt to our environment. Things like the physics are all part of our environment and as we learn more about the laws that govern the universe we are able to create better technology, which in turn leads to a longer lifespan and better health. People claim that our technology removes us from evolution, but our technology is an adaptation to our environment, which in turn leads to fitter organisms.

I must beg the Differ, it's only tecknologically that we evolve, its only tecknology that allows us to adapt the enviroment to us, rather than vice versa. Imagine an almost complete erasure of tecknology today, such as Nuclear holocaust (global).
Without tecknology 99% of us couldnt survive, we are perhaps 'weaker' than we ever were. Folk freak out when theres a power outage or food shortage. If there was no modern medicine, most folk would simply die, because they have lost touch with the natural world. Folk hiking die of exposure in days unless rescued.
Furless, weak teeth, we just havent adapted to nature physically at all, we are not genetically fitter. Our forbears had large strong teeth because they needed them, we have food processors and the means to preprocess it, our dentition is virtually useless.
We may live longer than ever, but where does this lead us? A growing aging population, a refusal as a race to self limit our own numbers, with no real prospect of living in space en mass within the realistic future, certainly not before the planet reaches max capacity to support us before its degraded of resources irrevocabley and irreversably.
Not to mention how self destructive we are with the tecknological 'advances' thatyou beleive show evolution.

WE are no longer in the same race as the rest of the biomass, we alone are devolving if anything, we are simply too arrogant and self confident in our ideas of 'progress' to realise it.

[edit on 4-3-2010 by wayaboveitall]

I don't know really, but usually i got scolded by my friends because I'm too kind... some people tries to take advantage of that, but I really don't care. I do what I feel mostly all times, and not seeking for acceptance or even good feelings. I just ACT when talking about kind acts. I usually do random acts of kindness too, with no reason.

As an example, tomorrow I'm going as voluntary to a charity event for homeless people before the earthquake, just wanting to help! The organizators where on Twitter searching for people who wanted to help, and I didn't think twice and I was sending an email to sign as voluntary. Why? just because I can, I have two hands and a working brain willing to help and that's enough. I'm going to guard the entrance from 3AM to 6 AM! hahaha, happily I'm used to go late to bed =)

However, I'm grumpy as hell. A kind hearted grumpy woman, as weird as it sounds so both theories stands I'm nore evolved