According to the empathy-altruism hypothesis popularized by social psychologist C. Daniel Batson, the average human individual, when exposed to knowledge of another's suffering, responds empathetically to such information with a restorative altruistic action. The more we expose ourselves to empathy, the more we act altruistically, and this has positive consequences beyond the restorative action itself.
Helping a person for whom one feels empathic concern is likely to enable the helper to gain social and self-rewards, avoid social and self-punishments, and reduce aversive arousal caused by witnessing the other’s suffering. But according to the empathy-altruism hypothesis, these benefits to self are not the ultimate goal of the motivation to help produced by empathy. They are either unintended consequences or the product of other motives (...). The empathy-altruism hypothesis claims that the ultimate goal of the motivation produced by empathic concern is to remove the empathy-evoking need. (p. 39) "Altruism in Humans·", C. Daniel Batson 2011; Oxford University Press
However, Effective Añtruism is largely based on a rejection of altruism motivated by empathy, and there are reasons for this: exposure gives us a biased view of existing suffering, as Paul Bloom recounts in his book "Against Empathy".
Batson, for his part, takes this objection into account and responds to it by showing that altruism can be motivated, in addition to empathy, by moral principles, by the internalization of these (normocentrism)... and by the altruistic personality.
To find support for the empathy-altruism hypothesis by no means rules out the possibility that there may be sources of altruistic motivation other than empathic concern. Several have been proposed, including an “altruistic personality” (…), principled moral reasoning (Kohlberg, 1976), and internalized prosocial values (p. 235) "Altruism in Humans·", C. Daniel Batson 2011; Oxford University Press
The dangers of moral principles are well known. Marxist ideology held that "the end justifies the means": the most altruistic act was the one most likely to lead to the success of the class struggle. On the other hand, to what extent is principled altruism motivating?
The major problem with principlism as a source of motivation to benefit others or society at large is its corruptibility (…) Moral principles are affirmed, but the motivation to uphold these principles seems weak.(…) people may conveniently forget to think about their moral principles if such an omission serves their interests (p. 225) "Altruism in Humans·", C. Daniel Batson 2011; Oxford University Press
Is there a way to combine the motivating force of empathic altruism with the logical precision of principled altruism?
Perhaps the solution lies in the development of an altruistic personality. Individuals who are personally motivated to be altruistic will act altruistically to the extent that, as a human being, they wish to preserve their own personality (moral principles are emotionally internalized—normocentrism). Since the motivational reference is their own personal experience (obviously, experiences of empathy, lived with greater or lesser proximity), we can be more certain that their altruistic moral principles will not be corrupted. Furthermore, elements of personality can include—apart from empathic sensitivity—intellectual rationalism and curiosity (which enhance the effectiveness of the altruistic act), and aggression control, which prevents a disproportionate empathic reaction (in the face of injustice, for example) from causing more harm than good.
Batson refers to the 1988 work on empathic personality by the Oliners. Samuel and Pearl Oliner studied one of the best-documented historical cases of people who developed altruistic behavior in extreme circumstances: the "rescuers" of the Jewish Holocaust.
If we can understand some of the attributes that distinguished rescuers from others, perhaps we can deliberately cultivate them (Preface) "The Altruistic Personality" Samuel and Pearl Oliner 1992; The Free Press
The Oliners' conclusion is that the altruistic personality is formed primarily in childhood (especially through affection and empathic social development in the home and family) and that ideological and educational factors play a minor role (though not nonexistent: a liberal and democratic ideology, as well as a higher level of education, helps). Innate factors cannot be ruled out either.
Parents whose disciplinary techniques are benevolent, particularly those who rely on reasoning, are more likely to have kind and generous children, children who behave helpfully with respect to others. (…) Inductive reasoning is particularly conducive to altruism. Induction focuses children’s attention on the consequences of their behaviors for others, drawing attention to others’ feelings, thoughts, and welfare. Children are thus led to understand others cognitively—a skill known as perspective- or role-taking—and are also thus more inclined to develop empathy toward others. (Chapter 7) "The Altruistic Personality" Samuel and Pearl Oliner 1992; The Free Press
So the question must be, how do we create altruistic personality in adults?
To suggest that all rescuers developed altruistic and inclusive inclinations because of good family relationships oversimplifies the complex realities (Chapter 7) "The Altruistic Personality" Samuel and Pearl Oliner 1992; The Free Press
When asking this question, we must consider that the extreme case of heroic Holocaust rescuers need not necessarily apply to, say, becoming a financial donor to altruistic causes in our time.
First and foremost, we should understand how "personality" of any kind is created in adults. We certainly know that, unfortunately, it is not too difficult to foster aggressive personalities, as happens in military training camps (a la "Full Metal Jacket").
Could our current knowledge about modifying behavioral patterns be applied here? Is there some kind of historical precedent for fostering altruistic personality that we could use as a basis for a future initiative in this direction?