Altruism vs. Serenity

At Ask a Manager, Alison Green fields the following question about some badly outdated advice: Why do people get so defensive over the concept of physically handing out resumes?

The person making the query witnessed a kid carrying around a stack of resumes and handing them out at a business plaza, likely at the urging of a clueless parent. Her ensuing conversation with a (younger!) coworker who saw the same spectacle went absolutely nowhere, and ended with a common type of complaint: [H]ow do I actually convince friends that this is a bad idea before they try it for themselves, if I even can?

As usual, Green gives a near-perfect reply:

As for how to convince friends it's a bad idea, you don't need to take it upon yourself to convince them! You can certainly share what you're learned and what your own experience has been -- and if the person seems skeptical or you're seeing them do things that are hurting their own chances you could send them a few links that might change their thinking -- but ultimately it's not really your job to change their thinking. Offer your perspective and talk about why you've come to it, but from there it's up to them. And really, life will set them straight eventually because if they try it, they're likely to see it doesn't work. I'm more concerned if it's someone giving that advice to impressionable others (like a career center telling students to do it), but that's a whole different issue. [bold added, links removed]

Although this post is about a mundane, fairly concrete issue, it contains a lesson applicable in spades to intellectual activism.

The desire to improve the culture by spreading better ideas makes sense, and not just to those of us who agree with Ayn Rand that history is ultimately driven by the kinds of ideas that dominate a culture -- or who simply want more rational people in our lives.

Likewise, the desire to simply help others do better in life isn't confined to having any sense of obligation to others. This person clearly wanted to help the kid out of good will, which is not, as many believe, the same thing as altruism.

It is easy to see the proper approach to trying to help others with Green's answer regarding this low-stakes issue: Do what you can, but know that past a certain point, it's up to them to understand, evaluate, and apply your advice, if they eventually accept it.

Past that point, one's efforts are a sacrifice of one's time, when it could be spent on better things. Interestingly, that is exactly what altruism demands of those who accept it. How many religious sects send people out to proselytize others? How many times have you met someone whose every conversation ends up being about some pet altruistic cause?

Even those of us who explicitly reject altruism will have to fight off its psychological remnants, which can manifest as an inability to let go of a lost cause like a person who thinks handing out paper resumes -- in the year 2026 -- is a great way to make a first impression.

I can't think of a better way to waste mental energy than by banging my head against such a wall, and that's because I did that a lot when I was younger. (Interestingly, discussions about evolution with a fundamentalist back when I was in college helped me understand this issue.)

Philosophy is, first and foremost, advice for how to live one's own life. And while, yes, it would be great if others in your life accepted a rational philosophy, you are missing the point if you spend too much time focused on making its case to their satisfaction. If people can be obtuse about small matters like this, they can and will be about bigger, more consequential things.

Don't be like them about them!

-- CAV