Science shows generosity causes happiness

[entropie]

They don't have both?

Hit, me punish me, give me animal names and bacon, yes they have both

 

[anticlimatic]

Classical economics is practically built around doubting this.

Might sound dumb, but... elaborate?

 

[Red Memories]

I...feel like science shouldn't have to tell us this. But many people have become selfish and all these days.
I can tell you generosity is not just fulfilling but humbling as well. When you do something for someone in need, it also makes you more thankful for the thing you have now. It tempers desire, humbles you, and gives a fulfillment selfishness and greed cannot give you.
And sure, there is no telling what they will do with what you give, but God isn't going to condemn you if you give a homeless man $20 for dinner, and he buys a wine bottle instead. That will be his sin.
God knows the pure intentions was to help someone.

 

[Luigi]

I...feel like science shouldn't have to tell us this. But many people have become selfish and all these days.
I can tell you generosity is not just fulfilling but humbling as well. When you do something for someone in need, it also makes you more thankful for the thing you have now. It tempers desire, humbles you, and gives a fulfillment selfishness and greed cannot give you.
And sure, there is no telling what they will do with what you give, but God isn't going to condemn you if you give a homeless man $20 for dinner, and he buys a wine bottle instead. That will be his sin.
God knows the pure intentions was to help someone.

This reminds me of a quote from James Norrington, from Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
"By remembering that I serve others, Mr. Sparrow, not only myself."

and yes, in case you haven't noticed, he's my new fictional role model

 

[Agent Washington]

No wonder I wasn't much good at economics.

i kno theres a possibility you might be joking but hey another istj who isnt tellenbach

anyway don't be fooled. that's not the be all and end all to economics

adam smith's hauptwork was written at a transitory period describing the idea that monopolising trade balance (or whatever it is) is basically no longer applicable in the era of globalisation and free-er capital flows. he's writing from the period of time when there was an active political intervention in securing overseas dependencies to maintain trade balance. adam smith's wealth of nations also actually recommended more role for the government than ppl tend to popularly remember, which is also pretty bullshit because ... honestly...........

anyway i dug this up real quick, it cites stuff
Economist's View: Adam Smith and the Role of Government if u look at this closely wealth of nations recommended more shit than was available until the workers' movements in the 1800s started to cause massive social reforms at least in great britain.

then there's keynes, that emerged after the great depression killed off any idea that classical economics are actually any good at describing economics

 

[OrangeAppled]

I’m going to be honest and say that I don’t get warm, fuzzy feelings from being generous or giving to others. This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder if I’m inferior Fe (ie INTP).

As such, I’m not motivated by an emotional reward. That’s why I won’t do something if I know it doesn’t benefit someone (ie giving money to the bum who uses it for drug/alcohol and then actually enabling their addiction). I prefer to be thoughtful with my time, energy and resources so it ultimately has a positive effect. I mostly give out of principle then, and it’s possibly why I rarely “feel good” about it. I have no doubt that by acting in line with my principles / values that it makes me a happier person. I simply rarely feel an immediate emotional reward. I also don’t tend to act to relieve my own discomfort. I tend to react negatively to any sense of obligation or I don’t feel one. If there is pressure to be generous so you are thought of as a “nice person”, I tend to reject that obligation unless it genuinely aligns with what I think is right or good (oh no, I AM so Fi).

I see a lot of people do “nice” things to boost their ego of being a “nice person” and not deeply considering if it really helps someone or if it’s even what someone wants. It’s quite common for the giver to feel a sense of entitlement for having given, perhaps that the recipient owes them or that they now can claim some control/influence over the recipient. Or they may feel “the universe” owes them for their “selflessness”.
Arguably this is not genuine generosity or selfless giving, but it’s extremely common. No matter the result, the person feels good because it’s really about their own ego. I suppose the positive is that their emotional reward moves them to take action a lot, and as the intention is probably good, it may often yield good results.

I can’t say it’s better to be someone who gives and feels no emotional reward. I will do something if I think it is right, that it will yield good results, that it makes sense as far as benefiting someone, etc, but I just don’t feel “moved”. It’s a little sad and I used to allow society to make me feel like I’m cold because I don’t feel those warm, fuzzies, but now I see how it’s actually very selfless of me. And I do see the positive effect in the big picture. I am more content overall in life when I act with integrity, so it does come back around to mutually benefit me and the other people.

 

[Forever_Jung]

I’m going to be honest and say that I don’t get warm, fuzzy feelings from being generous or giving to others. This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder if I’m inferior Fe (ie INTP).

As such, I’m not motivated by an emotional reward. That’s why I won’t do something if I know it doesn’t benefit someone (ie giving money to the bum who uses it for drug/alcohol and then actually enabling their addiction). I prefer to be thoughtful with my time, energy and resources so it ultimately has a positive effect. I mostly give out of principle then, and it’s possibly why I rarely “feel good” about it. I have no doubt that by acting in line with my principles / values that it makes me a happier person. I simply rarely feel an immediate emotional reward. I also don’t tend to act to relieve my own discomfort. I tend to react negatively to any sense of obligation or I don’t feel one. If there is pressure to be generous so you are thought of as a “nice person”, I tend to reject that obligation unless it genuinely aligns with what I think is right or good (oh no, I AM so Fi).

I see a lot of people do “nice” things to boost their ego of being a “nice person” and not deeply considering if it really helps someone or if it’s even what someone wants. It’s quite common for the giver to feel a sense of entitlement for having given, perhaps that the recipient owes them or that they now can claim some control/influence over the recipient. Or they may feel “the universe” owes them for their “selflessness”.
Arguably this is not genuine generosity or selfless giving, but it’s extremely common. No matter the result, the person feels good because it’s really about their own ego. I suppose the positive is that their emotional reward moves them to take action a lot, and as the intention is probably good, it may often yield good results.

I can’t say it’s better to be someone who gives and feels no emotional reward. I will do something if I think it is right, that it will yield good results, that it makes sense as far as benefiting someone, etc, but I just don’t feel “moved”. It’s a little sad and I used to allow society to make me feel like I’m cold because I don’t feel those warm, fuzzies, but now I see how it’s actually very selfless of me. And I do see the positive effect in the big picture. I am more content overall in life when I act with integrity, so it does come back around to mutually benefit me and the other people.

I really relate to this, especially with the guilt about being "cold". My mom is often horrified by how grimly (almost strategically) I approach being "nice". It's almost like human arithmetic with me, and sometimes I'll do nice things for people I hate, just because they technically are of equal value to everyone else in the world. I find the concept of pragmatic altruism very interesting.

Not that I claim to be altruistic, and I won't pretend I have never felt a sense of "good for me, doing something nice", when I gave a homeless dude a hot meal or whatever. But I definitely am not in it for the warm fuzzies, and often mentally flagellate myself on occasions where I notice a bit of smugness/egotism tainting my "good deeds".

That being said, I have begun to see some value in feeling good about doing good. I see it almost as a wellspring of energy that allows/inspires me to do more good than I can on sheer principled willpower alone. I think it's important not to feel like "OMG, I'm suuuuch a good person, I love meeeee", but to reframe it as gratitude for being in a position where I can help someone else.

 

[Smilephantomhive]

I don't care about intention as long as the good deep was done. Unless the intention is to manipulate because then harm will only come later.

 

[Typh0n]

I’m going to be honest and say that I don’t get warm, fuzzy feelings from being generous or giving to others. This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder if I’m inferior Fe (ie INTP).

As such, I’m not motivated by an emotional reward. That’s why I won’t do something if I know it doesn’t benefit someone (ie giving money to the bum who uses it for drug/alcohol and then actually enabling their addiction). I prefer to be thoughtful with my time, energy and resources so it ultimately has a positive effect. I mostly give out of principle then, and it’s possibly why I rarely “feel good” about it. I have no doubt that by acting in line with my principles / values that it makes me a happier person. I simply rarely feel an immediate emotional reward. I also don’t tend to act to relieve my own discomfort. I tend to react negatively to any sense of obligation or I don’t feel one. If there is pressure to be generous so you are thought of as a “nice person”, I tend to reject that obligation unless it genuinely aligns with what I think is right or good (oh no, I AM so Fi).

I see a lot of people do “nice” things to boost their ego of being a “nice person” and not deeply considering if it really helps someone or if it’s even what someone wants. It’s quite common for the giver to feel a sense of entitlement for having given, perhaps that the recipient owes them or that they now can claim some control/influence over the recipient. Or they may feel “the universe” owes them for their “selflessness”.
Arguably this is not genuine generosity or selfless giving, but it’s extremely common. No matter the result, the person feels good because it’s really about their own ego. I suppose the positive is that their emotional reward moves them to take action a lot, and as the intention is probably good, it may often yield good results.

I can’t say it’s better to be someone who gives and feels no emotional reward. I will do something if I think it is right, that it will yield good results, that it makes sense as far as benefiting someone, etc, but I just don’t feel “moved”. It’s a little sad and I used to allow society to make me feel like I’m cold because I don’t feel those warm, fuzzies, but now I see how it’s actually very selfless of me. And I do see the positive effect in the big picture. I am more content overall in life when I act with integrity, so it does come back around to mutually benefit me and the other people.

I feel the same way about being made to feel obliged about giving money to the poor, I don't think thats what generosity is about, I feel good being generous when its spontaneous. And it doesn't have to be with the homeless. In fact, most of the time, its not.

That being said, I don't claim to know what is beneficial to people or humanity as a whole. Things are just so...complex, its hard to see any objective good and I don't pretend to know whats best for anyone else.