Altruism, the doctrine that the wellbeing and dignity of others matters and yours does not, only produces nasty hypocrites 

Altruism is about having a spirit of “rather me than you”.  Not only are you about forgetting yourself for others you are about wishing bad things that happen to others by chance should strike you instead.  Such a harsh and unnatural morality makes us sceptical about how selfless altruists actually are!!

Can you prove that altruism turns people into hypocrites?

If it is good to put others before yourself and to hurt your feelings to spare theirs then the altruists do not live up to that standard at all. The sacrifice should be its own reward. Doctors and clergy and nurses and teachers and other vocations should get only a minimum of wage and not as a payment for what they have done but so that they will live to do more.

Altruism has to force doctors, carers and nurses, not to take much money so that altruism will be developed in others better through their example for people who look up to them.

Altruists do things like loving the pope despite all the harm through the propagation of AIDS his ban on condoms has effected in the more naïve regions of the globe. It is selfish of them to forgive him when they never suffered or knew what it was like for his victims though they knew about them. It is easy for them to forgive. We don’t see many of the high and mighty altruists doing voluntary work where the biggest problems are. And if they believe in God who looks after them in all situations their badness is compounded. They should be able to make any sacrifice if they believe in a Heaven they can go to. They cannot prove that free will exists or that altruism is good and they dare to say that teaching and developing altruism in others is the paramount duty meaning that teaching is. They don’t use people power to enforce altruism on the world and so they are just hypocrites and their good works are defiled by their hypocrisy and are just masochistic deceptions.

Will altruism lead to cynicism?

Suppose that altruism is possible and is identical with genuine goodness, then goodness is so difficult and unpleasant it follows that there can be few real altruists about and the altruists themselves will only be altruists occasionally. This will make it impossible for an altruist or believer in it to genuinely praise others.

One sin defiles all your good works for you do good and if you refuse to cast out the polluting sin. Your good works would be like water with a little poison in it that is only fit for throwing down the drain. Compassion will be impossible for it declares that a person should not suffer which is not true if we deserve it. It would be evil to ask us to feel sorry which is hurtful to ourselves for sympathy is painful for a person who did not deserve it. It would be the same as letting that person hit us across the face. Even one who has never done serious harm has done lots of little things that mount up to serious harm.

Religion or philosophy that accuses us of being rarely sinless is saying that one should assume that all people are bad no matter what they do. They deny this and claim that it is better not to injure the good by thinking they are bad for there is no, or not much of an injury in assuming that all are good even if you are wrong most of the time. There is injury in it. Bad people do more harm when they do not fear condemnation. If it is wrong to say a good person is bad then it is wrong to say a bad person is good. If you love the sinner you will not say, you will not pretend, that the sinner did not sin for sin demeans and harms the person who commits it. If most people are bad then it is anti-truth to make it out that most should be assumed to be good. It is not fair. If truth and justice do not matter then it is silly to say that people or yourself matter. This God that revealed religion wants us to lie to ourselves and then believe that he never deceives.

What about the argument that altruism is a precaution against becoming uncaring and ruthless?

Most thinking altruists know and use this argument but the truth is that altruism seeks to stop us caring for ourselves and to get us to destroy one another by making them as bad as us. It is rules altruism cares about not people.

If the argument for altruism is saying that we should be uncaring and ruthless to ourselves for the sake of others and serve them though we hate it then it is incoherent.

It is saying that we should abuse ourselves for others even when they don’t need it which is hardly a recipe for a moral theory. If altruism is needed to stop us becoming ruthless then clearly it needs to be practiced all the time and we need to practice constant self-denial.

Ethics would make no sense with the reasoning that it is okay to be ruthless and nasty to ourselves but not others.

There are do-gooder liars who say that altruism is the idea that we should like helping others. (This view is doubtful for altruism implies helping others not to please yourself at all). If they are right then we might as well be rational egoists and be there for others for we love being of service to them.

Anyway, the argument says that we are biased towards being antisocial. This is wrong for even the worst of us does not take every possible chance to do harm to others and double-dealing when they will get away with it. If we are as bad as altruism says then perhaps altruism was invented because we are evil and want to have an evil morality?

The person who feels terrible at the thought of stealing would be advised to steal until he stops to feel terrible about it and starts to enjoy it which means he refrains from stealing not because he feels he should - which is indulging himself but because it is his altruistic duty. Motive is more important than anything in altruism. A doctrine like altruism with its disinterest in what is good for individual practitioners, conditions people to undertake a life of crime for the attitude it has is at the root of crime. The sensibly selfish person will respect himself or herself too much to have a life of felony.

The naturalness of egoism or self-centredness means that you have to trick yourself into thinking you can and do put others first.  That amounts to a lot of deception for people want to believe they are rarely putting themselves first. They want to pretend they saved Jane because she was special and not because they felt like saving her.  If you are naturally selfish then trying to disguise it and hide it even from yourself will only make you selfish in a nasty and hostile way.  What passes for altruism is really passive aggression in theory and in practice.