Is it possible for an action to be completely selfless?

In the 'Friends' episode titled 'The One Where Phoebe Hates PBS,' Phoebe and Joey compete to find a truly selfless act, drawing inspiration from the ideas of philosopher Immanuel Kant.

They wonder if there is such a thing as a genuinely selfless act, one where a person benefits and the one performing it gains nothing. Joey disagrees; Phoebe tries to prove him wrong. After several failed attempts, Phoebe allows a bee to sting her 'so it can look cool in front of its bee friends.' She believes this is selfless: she suffered for the bee's benefit. However, Joey points out that the bee probably died shortly after losing its stinger in Phoebe's arm.

With the show nearing its end and her determination stronger than ever, Phoebe makes one final attempt. Despite her dislike for PBS, she donates $200 to the station during a fund drive, where Joey is answering phones. This act appears selfless: Phoebe would rather spend her money elsewhere, but chooses to give it to an organization she dislikes. Even better, her call puts Joey, a struggling actor, on camera. But Phoebe’s act has an unexpected twist. She feels good about helping her friend, which means she gained something from the act, thus nullifying its selflessness.

In the end, Phoebe uncovers what philosophers, social scientists, and neurologists have long known: it's challenging to prove the existence of a truly selfless act. But why do we, as humans, have a sense of selflessness or altruism to begin with? Could there be a biological foundation for our good deeds? Learn more on the next page.

Altruism: A Biological Necessity?

Whenever researchers use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to observe subjects performing specific tasks, it seems that they uncover another hidden aspect of our brains. Altruism is no exception.

A 2006 study focused on anonymous charitable donations, which are a clear example of altruistic behavior: The donor gains no reward, gives away hard-earned money to help a stranger, and does so without expecting any recognition, since the donation is anonymous. It represents altruism in its most genuine form.

Researchers have discovered that those who contributed to charitable causes did experience a form of benefit: the warm-fuzzies. In a study with 19 female volunteers, participants were given the option to either keep money for themselves or donate it to charities with varying ideologies. The study revealed that the act of giving activated the same reward center in the brain as receiving money, demonstrating the psychological rewards of generosity [source: Moll, et al.].

In a follow-up study, MRI scans were used to examine the phenomenon of altruism. The results of this study challenged the idea that people act selflessly due to the good feelings it generates. Instead, the researchers concluded that altruism is driven by the perception that others are similar to us. They discovered that the part of the brain involved in analyzing social bonds is activated when we assess whether someone would reciprocate our kind actions, suggesting that people are more likely to help others when they believe those others would act altruistically in return [source: Duke University].

But what could be the evolutionary reason behind such behavior?

Evolutionary theory suggests that behaviors develop because they enhance an organism's chances of survival. For example, animals experience hunger to signal the need for food, and plants drop their leaves in the fall to create protective barriers for the winter. According to this logic, altruism should not even exist, as it doesn't directly benefit the individual’s survival.

Author Sophie F. Dingfelder writes, 'For any behavior to survive natural selection, it needs to help an animal or its genetic material' [source: APA]. This presents a challenge to the idea that humans have an innate drive to help others at their own expense, as it contradicts evolutionary principles. Therefore, altruism must serve some hidden function that contributes to survival. But what could this purpose be?

A frequently mentioned example of altruism is a mother putting herself in danger to protect her child's life. As Daniel J. Kruger from the University of Michigan notes, this is a clear case of kin selection from an evolutionary perspective. The idea that altruism is driven by kinship, with our relatives being the primary beneficiaries of our selflessness, supports the notion that altruism exists to preserve our genetic lineage.

In his book, ‘The Selfish Gene,’ Richard Dawkins suggests that humans are simply 'vehicles' for their genetic line. As we pass on half of our genes, our protective instincts towards our offspring or blood relatives, even at the risk of our own lives, can be understood as a genetic drive to ensure the survival of our lineage.

Other theories of altruism exist within the scientific community. One such theory argues that altruism does not stem from a genetic impulse, but rather exists outside of ourselves. You can explore the social consequences of altruism on the following page.

The Social Implications of Altruism

In his exploration of morality, French sociologist Emile Durkheim refrained from using terms like 'good' to describe acts of altruism. For Durkheim, altruism was not an individual trait but an external force imposed by society. It existed solely to maintain societal integrity, with no personal benefit for the individual involved.

Durkheim described altruism as 'a violent and voluntary act of self-destruction without personal gain,' and as 'the opposite of rational self-interest' [source: Dubeski]. According to him, altruistic behaviors arise because the needs of society and individuals are often in conflict. Since society's needs are perceived as more important than the individual’s, self-sacrificial acts like altruism are necessary to ensure individuals serve the greater good.

While some of Durkheim's critics argue that he overgeneralizes in his views on altruism and morality, other anthropologists support his perspective. Some believe that society could not have developed without the cooperation that altruism fosters [source: Logan].

The idea that altruism is an external societal construct is referred to as social subjectivism, which is 'the belief that truth and morality are creations of the collective mind of a group' [source: Capitalism Magazine]. This suggests that society has collectively invented the concept of altruism and placed high value on it. People admire those who make personal sacrifices for the greater good, believing them to be noble. If Durkheim and others are right, we may have internalized altruism to such an extent that our brains release pleasure when we perform selfless acts.

For individualists (or egoists), the notion of altruism as a social invention is seen as dangerous. They argue it contradicts human nature. 'Each man takes responsibility for his own life and happiness and lets others do the same. No one sacrifices himself to others, nor sacrifices others to himself' [source: Strata]. From an egoist's perspective, altruism enables exploitation by totalitarian regimes: 'Under totalitarianism and state terror, no one is granted the moral right to exist for their own sake but must exist for others or a specific societal vision' [source: Dubeski]. To them, altruism represents a form of subservience that falsely makes individuals feel virtuous.

It appears we've strayed quite a bit from the original question: Is it possible for an act to be truly selfless? If the evidence from MRI scans holds true, we must contend with our brain's reward system. If evolutionary theorists are correct, we perform acts of altruism to protect our genetic legacy. And if subjectivists are right, we are altruistic simply because we adhere to societal expectations. At this point, the idea of a truly selfless act seems increasingly unlikely.

However, there are two bright spots in this otherwise bleak picture. Even though altruistic acts may provide us with some form of reward, whether tangible or not, it remains an individual choice whether to engage in such behaviors. And if helping others brings us a sense of fulfillment, does that diminish its value in any way?

To delve deeper into how your brain functions, evolution, and related topics, continue on to the next page.