Some Pre-Meds Missing the Point?

[neil100]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Exactly the point i was arguing. True altruism never existed period.

Also wanted to point out that things were no better back in the day then they are now. People will always do what it takes to survive and make money and there will always be greedy people and people who do charity and people who are not greedy but not necessarily charitable either, just simple.

It is hardly fair to say people were better before then now as we did not live back in the day and judging from all the history reports it seems greedy people and people who are wanting power and to get ahead in the world existed since the beginning of time otherwise why would people go conquering other people's lands or why would there be such big wars going on all the time in names of things like religion and what not as excuses for justification of such.

This is why I get annoyed by people who get on other people's cases for doing something for a reason other then "pure altruism".

Wow!!!...........such an extreme statement don't you think!

Have you heard of Gandhi, Mother Teresa by any chance??!!! Just to mention the top two.

Do you know the complete history of humanity from 5000-6000BC to circa 1990s? Have you studied or know people who were undoubtedly purely altruistic?

The better claim to make would be that the sense of altruism has gone down, especially since latter half of twentieth century into the 21st century. You can see this from the reprecussions of unregulated free marker/capitalistic ideals. Look what happened in the economic collapse. All of the gold diggers are enjoying their time at the beach with pay-as-you-do "honeys".

Also, here is a derivation that one can make from your conclusion, which is pure altruism never existed period.

Do you do generous things for your friends? or for loved ones? or heck do you even want to be with your loved ones? Do you believe in family? I mean these questions can go on and on.

Many people around the world would disagree with the statement pure altruism never existed because it just isn't true. If that was the case then why do we have friends? why do we exchange gifts? why do we do generous things sometimes out of pure generosity? ......Are these activities just lapses in our mind?

I am just saying, you are making an extreme argument which by nature leaves a lot of holes and gaps for someone to dispute.

 

[neil100]

From a idealistic perspective, why is a financial reward worse than, say, an emotional reward? From this perspective, one might argue there is no 'true pure altruism'.

Because the concept of financial reward is artificially created.
Higher source or god didn't hardcode our brains with money notes, gold, exchanging animals for trade, etc.

Scientifically we know that our brain responds to emotions. That is why we have almost an entire lobe (limbic system/lobe-although not a true lobe), amygdala, lateral prefrontal cortex and similar structures in our brains.

 

[savant]

Because the concept of financial reward is artificially created.
Higher source or god didn't hardcode our brains with money notes, gold, exchanging animals for trade, etc.

Scientifically we know that our brain responds to emotions. That is why we have almost an entire lobe (limbic system/lobe-although not a true lobe), amygdala, lateral prefrontal cortex and similar structures in our brains.

Hmm, I should be more clear.

Psychological egoism from wiki

Psychological egoism can be accused of using circular logic. For instance, an egoist would not disagree with the following syllogism: "If a person has willingly performed an act, then he/she has manifested such intent in the form of that act. Fulfillment of one's desires is the primary requisite of satisfaction. Ergo, a person can only willingly perform acts that result in his/her personal enjoyment." This logic is sometimes viewed as circular or presumptuous. Specifically, egoism leans on the assumption that satisfaction is synonymous with self-satisfaction. Such a precept automatically sidesteps counterpoint, however, and remains unfalsifiable. Thus, until empirical evidence favors one view or the other, egoism must acquiesce to uncertainty.

 

[binko]

Very scarce. [Altruism] used to exists a lot more. But, something remarkable happened during the conception of the 21st century. Go figure.

What? 😕

 

[neil100]

Hmm, I should be more clear.

Psychological egoism from wiki

mhmmm I, the very person who despises arrogance in reality, just practiced psychological egoism. yup. well caught, sir.

I bow to thee!

 

[Narmerguy]

Just like people who serve my big mac don't smile at me because they enjoy a friendly encounter and share a love for meat but because they get paid to do it. Doesn't really bother me, still tastes good.

 

[mirrorpair]

Agreed that way too often we continue in activites that are meaningless to us because we're told they are essential to demonstrating our fitness to be given an acceptance to med school. Since adcomms assess us via various formulae, be are obliged to fulfill their expectations to achieve our goals. Happily some of those activies turn out to be important to us, so they aren't all a dead loss.

+1

Adcoms need to go through 6000 apps and they're going to take shortcuts to evaluate us--and we're going to be here to take advantage of those shortcuts.

 

[cliffhuxtableDO]

Even personal satisfaction or enjoyment that someone might get from volunteering is a reward. I agree there is no "true altruism".

 

[atomi]

-

 

[WilsonFan]

How is this any different from a guy opening a door, pulling out the chair, and opening the car door for you on the first date? I'm not saying this cut-and-dry premed mentality isn't a shame (surely it is, and I think those who don't truly enjoy the concept of research and volunteering at least a little might want to reconsider a different medically-related activity or even a different career choice), but I just think volunteering/research (esp if you hate it) at least shows your commitment and interest in trying to be a doctor just like those $70app fee and 3 hours spent on the secondary do (and opening door, pulling out chair, etc).

 

[atomi]

-

 

[Arjuna]

Would anyone agree with me on the fact that some (perhaps most) tend to lose perspective of their roles in this system we refer to as the medical field?

Point 1. Because of the structure of the medical school admission process, pre-meds are led to think that there are certain things that they must do to gain admission.

Point 2. It may become easy to think of volunteering as a necessity for acceptance into medical school rather than an opportunity to experience the role of the pre-med student in the service for others. Suddenly, the # of hours might matter more than what the student may have felt or thought about their volunteering experience.

Point 3. Research may also become one of those things that someone who wants to get into a "good" medical school should do, instead of viewing their research opportunity as a small portion of humanity's search for better understanding of the truth.


Anyone?

Uh, are you suggesting that only people who want to "innately" volunteer, or those who have a passion for research should think about medical school? Puh-Lease, with the world population exploding faster than a mixture of potassium and water and the number of premed students rising each year (along with average GPA and MCAT) how many do you think actually like doing all these things? Very few. No one wants to stay up all night at the ER when there is a Biochem test the following day, but we still do it, CUZ we have to get IN. The point is, it is all about competition, and someone has to WIN, as in get accepted. Unfortunately that means wiping asses and licking other peoples shoes to get those Rec letter and those mighty ECs on the AMCAS. Its just a dog's world man, and lets face it, a premeds gotta do what a premeds gotta do (even if it means "forcing" oneself to volunteer and do the other stuff)

 

[neil100]

First, the brain creates emotions, and the body responds to them - you have it backwards.

Second, the concept of financial reward is really financial exchange. When you get money, it involves exchanging your best productive work for the best productive work of someone else. If you are not productive or your work is of poor quality, then you get little in return. This is a profoundly moral concept and is responsible for all the advancements we have today.

Doing something for nothing or receiving something for nothing is in direct contrast to the concept and represents a form of serious evil and is responsible for all of the problems we have today.

I volunteer because I enjoy it. That is what I get from it. If I were doing it for nothing and getting no satisfaction or advancement in return, then it would be wrong.

👍
Well yes of course that's what I meant. But, from responding to another persons' physical behavior or something of that sort then it is backwards in that sense.
Like someone smiles at you. Then our brain processes that and we smile back using voluntary facial muscles, for example.

 

[neil100]

A lot of people will argue that Gandhi's reward was a free india. It wasn't like he was doing this just for the sake of doing it. There was a reward. Reward was being able to get rid of britishers and have rule of India again. Several will also argue that Gandhi's actions were not always in the best interest of india esp. his post freedom actions such as separating pakistan and india and bangladesh or creating socialistic govt in India which didn't do much to help it rise as a country. Also people will argue that almost any person like Mother Theresa or any nun, priest, etc. are not doing their work just for the sake of doing it to help people but for reward from god when they die. So I'd disagree with you again.

Again I repeat, true altruism doesn't exist. To some degree there is a reward whether a reward of getting to heaven or a financial reward or a reward of having your country back in your hands, etc. etc. to everyone's actions.

Wow you are laughably incorrect. You obviously don't have a clue about Gandhi's views as well as Mother Teresa.

Gandhi wanted to separate India and Pakistan. Lmao. wow! You have absolutely no clue about Gandhi and your statement just confirmed that for me. I would encourage you to read up on Gandhi because you clearly don't understand him.
Also, it shows that you don't know much about the history of India. If you did, then you would realize that whatever you just said is something that isn't even true. You still need to learn about the people who wanted to partition India. So, you have a long way to go to reach the 21st century.

And why does everything have to be about India for you. Can't you just analyze discussions from a global point of view. People like Gandhi and Mother Teresa are lauded globally. Not just in certain parts of the world. So, I hope when you respond to my post, you will have a global perspective.

I am just going to ignore everything you have to say about Gandhi as well as Mother Teresa because your mind sees the reality and facts from the way it wants to "see" it.
All I can say is ignorance is bliss. It is just amazing how people turn reality into the way they see fit without getting a dose of the real "thing" or just ignoring the real "thing". It seems to happen more often these days.

Wow, way to slap down probably the two greatest human being that have ever lived through this planet. You might want to read up on them to make sure you are talking about the right people. Thanks.

 

[neil100]

The one who knows nothing about india seems to be you. Your arguments are truly circular and laughable. Truth is no one person could be truly altruistic because we all have a degree of selfishness to us because we are no different then any other creature we do things to survive in this world. You are truly confusing altruism and doing good for others. They are not necessarily one in the same. people do things that help others but it is not always for the purpose of true altruism i.e. no reward period of any sort i.e. not doing it for the sake of getting into god's home, not doing it for money, not doing it for getting your country out of the hands of other people, not doing something for some other reason then just the sake of doing it. There is a purpose for why everyone does something and true altruism can exist if a person has no other purpose for doing something other then just doing it.

But I'm done arguing with you as everyone else is.

Your first two lines demonstrate your arrogance very clearly. You make absurd and extreme claims about people who you don't even know. Notice I said you didn't know much about history of India. That doesn't mean you know nothing about the history of India. You just generalize everything and want me make people believe what you think. ie impose your views on others. You use words like truly to do that. Generalization isn't a "good thing" lot of times.

I was going to actually suggest some really excellent books to read up on those two people but you just had to respond in an attacking manner. Oh well.

You just have your own weird definition of altruism. I say why even have that word in the dictionary if humans never demonstrate it. It's obviously useless. It's kind of like we are fighting a lost cause.
But, whatever. I will let others respond. You don't need to speak for everyone else. They can speak for themselves.

Edit:
Also, I am going to ask you this once again. Why do we give hugs to our mom, dads, relatives? Why do we sometimes just do things without expecting anything physical in return or to not just show good manners?
Why do people do positive things for certain people when they know that they will not receive any kind of reward? I mean this sort of introspection can go on and on. Are these just lapses in our mind in which our consciousness fades?
Would these sort of acts be considered "false altruism" or "impure altruism"?

 

[Siverhideo1985]

everyone...stop embarrassing yourself on the internetz...it is serious business afterall.

 

[NoMoreAMCAS]

I agree, i literally did all of this non-sense just to get into medical school. I only cared how many hours I had completed so I could fill my app. Had i been a business major or something similar, no way would I have done the same EC's.

 

[runrunrudolph1]

I think the whole process is what you make it. Sure we do volunteering etc. as a checklist, but the stuff I saw and learned while volunteering will definitely help me become a better doctor. It is kinda sad but how else are they supposed to distinguish between us?

 

[NoMoreAMCAS]

I think the whole process is what you make it. Sure we do volunteering etc. as a checklist, but the stuff I saw and learned while volunteering will definitely help me become a better doctor. It is kinda sad but how else are they supposed to distinguish between us?

GPA + MCAT.


Lol, just kidding, don't get pissed. I don't know how else to do it, but I know that every pre-med student I know would not be doing all of this volunteering if they were not pre-med. It's just a bunch of nonsense required to get in and I think most students wish they didn't have too.