现实利他行为与网络利他行为对大学生主观幸福感的影响：多重中介模型

为探讨现实利他行为与网络利他行为对主观幸福感的影响,并着力考察现实社会支持、网络社会支持与自尊在其中所起的作用,以1064名在读大学生为被试进行问卷调查,研究结果显示：（1）现实利他行为和网络利他行为均能在一定程度上预测主观幸福感。（2）现实、网络社会支持和自尊是现实和网络利他行为对主观幸福感产生影响的两条并行中介路径。（3）现实和网络利他行为与现实和网络社会支持之间存在交互作用。     

Populism and religion: On the politics of fear

Our societies of fear go along with an increase of populist movements in politics. This article explains the basics of populism and shows how easily it joins highly likely political friend‐enemy patterns. Anthropologically, we have to deal with parochial altruism undergirded by a static type of religion. A further step deals with the relationship between politics and fear by referring to terror management theory and its insight into the relationship between mortality and fear. The concluding part addresses ways out of fear and in what way a dynamic type of religion helps to avoid scapegoating and political enmity.     

Introduction: Egoism,Altruism and Impartiality

The distinction between egoistic and altruistic motivation is firmly embedded in contemporary moral discourse, but harks back too to early modern attempts to found morality on an egoistic basis. Rejecting that latter premise means accepting that others’ interests have intrinsic value, but it remains far from clear what altruism demands of us and what its relationship is with the rest of morality. While informing our duties, altruism seems also to urge us to transcend them and embrace the other-regarding values and virtues constitutive of a good life. This rather wide conception of morality may strike us today as too demanding. At the same time, however, currently popular impartialist accounts of morality can disrupt much everyday altruism in their insistence that each person’s interests are weighed precisely equally. Having sketched this problematic of altruism, the second half of this Introduction outlines the arguments of the four papers and review essay in this collection, each of which, in a different way, negotiates the difficult relationships between egoism, altruism, morality and impartiality. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Humanitarian Intervention, Altruism, and the Limits of Casuistry

This essay argues that the ethics of humanitarian intervention cannot be readily subsumed by the ethics of just war without due attention to matters of political and moral motivation. In the modern era, a just war draws directly from self-benefitting motives in wars of self-defense, or indirectly in wars that enforce international law or promote the global common good. Humanitarian interventions, in contrast, are intuitively admirable insofar as they are other-regarding. That difference poses a challenge to the casuistry of humanitarian intervention because it makes it difficult to reason by analogy from the case of war to the case of humanitarian intervention. The author develops this point in dialogue with Michael Walzer, the U.S. Catholic bishops, and President Clinton. He concludes by showing how a casuistry of intervention is possible, developing a motivational rationale that draws on the Golden Rule.     

Poverty and the Peril of Particulars

Moral extremists argue for a demanding duty of poverty relief by leveraging powerful intuitions about our duties to rescue those close at hand. I clear the way for a less demanding duty by arguing that this argumentative strategy commits the extremist to a conception of our duty in the face of global poverty that is deeply at odds with our convictions about how we may discharge that duty. These convictions reveal that global poverty and easy rescue cases give rise to duties of different kinds: whereas duties of rescue are ultimately explicable by appeal to moral claims to assistance, duties of poverty relief are not. The extremist’s most compelling argumentative strategy is therefore not viable—he may not straightforwardly appeal to facts about the demandingness of duties of rescue in arguing for demanding duties of poverty relief.     

Saving Them From Yourself: AnInquiry into the South Asian Gift of Fearlessness

This article considers the importance of indigenous classifications in the study of comparative ethics. Specifically, it explores medieval South Asian gift discourses from Jain, Theravada, and Hindu Dharmasastra sources, which list and discuss a variety of prescribed gifts. Such lists generally include a category of gift known as the “gift of fearlessness”(abhayadana), wherein refraining from harming others is considered a species of gift giving. This type of gift and the discussions concerning it unite generosity and nonviolence in a way that is suggestive for understanding how some medieval South Asian theorists conceived of the gift, human nature, and altruism.     

Altruistic or selfish? Responses when safety is threatened depend on childhood socioeconomic status

Altruism is an effective method of coping with threats. This research explored the relationship between childhood socioeconomic status (SES) and altruism under different situations. The results of five studies provided reliable evidence that safety-threat conditions moderated the relationship between childhood SES and altruism. Individuals with higher childhood SES exhibited higher altruistic intentions (Studies 1 and 2) and behaviors (Study 3) when they were manipulated to imagine a safety threat scenario (Study 1), when viewing pictures of disasters (Study 2), and when they were manipulated to believe that their health was under threat (Study 3). However, their childhood SES had no significant impact on their altruistic intentions and behaviors in relatively safe environments (Studies 1–3). This effect was again tested in more realistic environmental conditions using a large-scale survey in Study 4. In Study 5, we explored the underlying mechanism behind the earlier findings (i.e., temporal discounting).     

Reciprocal altruism: It’s relationship to locus of control and dispositional optimism among Nigerian undergraduates

The study examined locus of control and dispositional optimism influences on reciprocal altruism among Nigerian university undergraduate students. Participants consisted of 253 undergraduate students in their second year of study (males = 151 (60%), females = 102 (40%); mean age = 21.2, SD = 9.10). They completed the Dispositional Optimism Test-Revised (Scheier, Carver, &; Bridges, 1994 Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., &; Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem: A re-evaluation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1063–1078. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.1063[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), the Altruistic Personality Scale (Rushton, Chrisjohn &; Fekken, 1981 Rushton, J. P., Chrisjohn, R. D., &; Fekken, G. C. (1981). The altruistic personality and the self-report altruism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 1, 292–302. [Google Scholar]), and the Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966 Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976[Crossref], [PubMed] , [Google Scholar]). Multiple regression analysis indicated that internal locus of control positively predicted reciprocal altruism; while dispositional optimism did not. Future research should examine other dimensions of optimism such as adaptive utility, comparative and strategic dispositional optimism involved that may provide more insight into the understanding of reciprocal altruism in Nigeria.     

COGNITIVE AND EVOLUTIONARY FACTORS IN THE EMERGENCE OF HUMAN ALTRUISM

One of the central tenets of Christian theology is the denial of self for the benefit of another. However, many views on the evolution of altruism presume that natural selection inevitably leads to a self‐seeking human nature and that altruism is merely a façade to cover underlying selfish motives. I argue that human altruism is an emergent characteristic that cannot be reduced to any one particular evolutionary explanation. The evolutionary processes at work in the formation of human nature are not necessarily in conflict with the possibility of altruism; rather, aspects of human nature are uniquely directed toward the care and concern of others. The relationship between altruism, human nature, and evolution can be reimagined by adopting an emergent view of the hierarchy of science and a theological worldview that emphasizes self‐renunciation. The investigation of altruism necessitates an approach that analyzes several aspects of altruistic behavior at different levels in the hierarchy of sciences. This research includes the study of evolutionary adaptations, neurological systems, cognitive functions, behavioral traits, and cultural influences. No one level is able to offer a full explanation, but each piece adds a unique dimension to a much larger puzzle.