Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
Tue Oct 8, 2013, 04:17 AM Oct 2013

Scientific American: How Wealth Reduces Compassion

This is from a year ago, but today Thom Hartmann was talking about how when you get rich you lose compassion so I googled and found this article.

Pretty relevant today considering the wealth disparity, Citizens "United" and the Kochs orchestrating the shutdown.

How Wealth Reduces Compassion

As riches grow, empathy for others seems to decline

By Daisy Grewal

<snip>

In order to figure out whether selfishness leads to wealth (rather than vice versa), Piff and his colleagues ran a study where they manipulated people’s class feelings. The researchers asked participants to spend a few minutes comparing themselves either to people better off or worse off than themselves financially. Afterwards, participants were shown a jar of candy and told that they could take home as much as they wanted. They were also told that the leftover candy would be given to children in a nearby laboratory. Those participants who had spent time thinking about how much better off they were compared to others ended up taking significantly more candy for themselves--leaving less behind for the children.

A related set of studies published by Keltner and his colleagues last year looked at how social class influences feelings of compassion towards people who are suffering. In one study, they found that less affluent individuals are more likely to report feeling compassion towards others on a regular basis. For example, they are more likely to agree with statements such as, “I often notice people who need help,” and “It’s important to take care of people who are vulnerable.” This was true even after controlling for other factors that we know affect compassionate feelings, such as gender, ethnicity, and spiritual beliefs.

In a second study, participants were asked to watch two videos while having their heart rate monitored. One video showed somebody explaining how to build a patio. The other showed children who were suffering from cancer. After watching the videos, participants indicated how much compassion they felt while watching either video. Social class was measured by asking participants questions about their family’s level of income and education. The results of the study showed that participants on the lower end of the spectrum, with less income and education, were more likely to report feeling compassion while watching the video of the cancer patients. In addition, their heart rates slowed down while watching the cancer video—a response that is associated with paying greater attention to the feelings and motivations of others.

<snip>

But why would wealth and status decrease our feelings of compassion for others? After all, it seems more likely that having few resources would lead to selfishness. Piff and his colleagues suspect that the answer may have something to do with how wealth and abundance give us a sense of freedom and independence from others. The less we have to rely on others, the less we may care about their feelings. This leads us towards being more self-focused. Another reason has to do with our attitudes towards greed. Like Gordon Gekko, upper-class people may be more likely to endorse the idea that “greed is good.” Piff and his colleagues found that wealthier people are more likely to agree with statements that greed is justified, beneficial, and morally defensible. These attitudes ended up predicting participants’ likelihood of engaging in unethical behavior.

more...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-wealth-reduces-compassion

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Scientific American: How Wealth Reduces Compassion (Original Post) cui bono Oct 2013 OP
Like hoarding, obscene wealth is a disease, IMHO grahamhgreen Oct 2013 #1
+1 Definitely not healthy. nt Live and Learn Oct 2013 #2
The only Difference is, BillyRibs Oct 2013 #3
And the one left untreated is the one who is ruthlessly hoarding cui bono Oct 2013 #9
Civilization is the ultimate in hoarding wealth and resources The2ndWheel Oct 2013 #6
All one has to do is listen to the words used by people... yuiyoshida Oct 2013 #4
What about the great philanthropists? mrsadm Oct 2013 #5
Many philanthropists dotymed Oct 2013 #7
They are not philanthropists. Edim Oct 2013 #8
I think many do it for tax purposes and for image, but there are always anomolies cui bono Oct 2013 #10

yuiyoshida

(41,831 posts)
4. All one has to do is listen to the words used by people...
Tue Oct 8, 2013, 06:09 AM
Oct 2013

Like Rush Limbaugh, or Commentators on Fox News... Words from people like Bachmann, or other high Profile Republicans. Many who talk about never giving loose change to the homeless... how great it felt to get one over, on a person by snatching up their house and making them homeless... I have seen so many examples of selfish behavior.. and people who do not give a damn about others. The people who get mad at disabled Veterans for getting a pension, or people who have to survive on food stamps. They use terms like "Welfare Queen" and more disparaging terms for people who actually care about other people.

People who vote against their best interest are the ones who most puzzle me. If they were to win the lottery, they would be dancing in the street, yet when someone else gets it, who was really needy, they complain about a rigged system.

mrsadm

(1,198 posts)
5. What about the great philanthropists?
Tue Oct 8, 2013, 06:50 AM
Oct 2013

I understand the points made in the article, but it does not jive with things like the Bill Gates foundation, Andrew Carnegie, and on and on.

dotymed

(5,610 posts)
7. Many philanthropists
Tue Oct 8, 2013, 07:15 AM
Oct 2013

(ie.. Bill and Melinda Gates) use their philanthropy to further their narrow views on the poor. The Gates funnel their money into the charter school system which is for-profit "education."
Sadly, if you look closely most have strict stipulations on their charity.
Tax write-offs where they still control how their largesse is dispersed.

Edim

(300 posts)
8. They are not philanthropists.
Tue Oct 8, 2013, 07:22 AM
Oct 2013

They're hypocrites and only interested in improving their public image and tax dodge.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
10. I think many do it for tax purposes and for image, but there are always anomolies
Tue Oct 8, 2013, 01:06 PM
Oct 2013

to any generalization or rule.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Scientific American: How ...