Why Superman Will Not Save the World: Theorizing the Relationship Between Suffering and DC Comics Superman (Translation into Russian)

The hypothesis that there is an inextricable link between comic book superheroes and suffering would, to anyone with a cursory knowledge of superhero characters found in DC, Marvel, Image, Wildstorm and other houses, and their histories, ostensibly seem valid. This validity depends on which character one is applying said hypothesis to; the psychological and physical suffering of a Batman being more acceptable as such than that of a Plastic Man, for example. However, using DC Comics character Superman as a case study, this paper explores the inextricable link between Otherness, power, and suffering within the remit of the character's mythos. In order to do so, this paper refers to psychoanalytic concepts elaborated by Sigmund Freud in his text Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1922) as a way of demonstrating that despite the character's conventional appraisal as a positivist humanistic symbol of pure altruism, an insuperable, unimpeachable symbol of selflessness and good morality, there is in fact a fundamental link between Superman's 'tridentity' of selves (Clark Kent/Kal-El/Superman), the character's own suffering, and human suffering on a terrestrial scale, as represented within the numerous realities of the DC Comics Multiverse.

ALTRUISM AND MORAL ENHANCEMENT

ABSTRACT In this article I will be discussing what altruism is, distinguishing altruistic motivations (pure and impure) and altruistic behaviour (soft and robust). Pure altruism is when the motivation to benefit another is exclusively to increase the other's welfare, and impure altruism is when the motivation to benefit another is solely to increase your own wellbeing, or includes on some level, increasing your own welfare. Soft altruism is helping behaviour and robust altruism is improving the welfare of another individual at the expense of the altruist. Having made these distinctions I move on to show that altruism is a requirement of morality. I argue that the three main principles of morality (categorical imperative, golden rule and the greatest happiness principle) are not only compatible with, but also recommend soft altruism. Finally I argue that the probability of people continuing to practise altruistic acts is higher when we are purely motivated, and if that is the case not only classic moral enhancement but also biotechnological moral enhancement can have a role in bringing people over to the altruistic side, stimulating their ‘other regarding ’ motivations, thus contributing to spreading altruistic behaviour and morality throughout the world.

Why Superman Will Not Save the World: Theorizing the Relationship Between Suffering and DC Comics Superman

The hypothesis that there is an inextricable link between comic book superheroes and suffering would, to anyone with a cursory knowledge of superhero characters found in DC, Marvel, Image, Wildstorm and other houses, and their histories, ostensibly seem valid. This validity depends on which character one is applying said hypothesis to; the psychological and physical suffering of a Batman being more acceptable as such than that of a Plastic Man, for example. However, using DC Comics character Superman as a case study, this paper explores the inextricable link between Otherness, power, and suffering within the remit of the character's mythos. In order to do so, this paper refers to psychoanalytic concepts elaborated by Sigmund Freud in his text Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1922) as a way of demonstrating that despite the character's conventional appraisal as a positivist humanistic symbol of pure altruism, an insuperable, unimpeachable symbol of selflessness and good morality, there is in fact a fundamental link between Superman's 'tridentity' of selves (Clark Kent/Kal-El/Superman), the character's own suffering, and human suffering on a terrestrial scale, as represented within the numerous realities of the DC Comics Multiverse.

Attitude Toward Social Enterprises: A Comparison between For-Profit and Social Enterprise Employees

Social enterprises, organizations that pursue social purposes while generating profits, have garnered attention recently as potential key players for a sustainable economy. However, research on the perception of social enterprises by lay people has been ignored even though positive reception of social enterprises is an important condition for their sustainability. In the present study, we compared for-profit enterprise employees (n = 200) and social enterprise employees (n = 162) and examined their differences in attitude toward the profit-making aspects of social enterprises as well as the employees working for social enterprises. The results showed that for-profit enterprises overestimated that social enterprise employees were extrinsically motivated and underestimated their prosocial intentions. In addition, for-profit enterprise employees were less favorable toward the profit-making aspects of social enterprises, including payment of high salaries for the social enterprise employees and using donations to run social enterprises. Interestingly, the difference between for-profit and social enterprise employees in their attitude toward the profit-making aspects of social enterprises was explained by lay theories of altruism called “pure altruism.” The present research makes important contributions by identifying the psychological mechanisms that underlie individuals’ perceptions and attitude toward social enterprises.

Recycling cooperation and buying status

Purpose This study aims to reconcile previous research that has provided mixed results regarding motivation for sustainable behaviors: pure altruism (cooperation) or competitive altruism (status). Drawing on evolutionary altruism and identity-based motivation, the authors propose that a match between pure (competitive) altruism and individualistic (collectivistic) identity goals enhance consumers’ motivations to engage in recycling (green buying). Design/methodology/approach Three experimental studies show how pure and competitive altruism are associated with specific sustainable consumption (Study 1) and how altruism types should be matched with identity goals to motivate sustainable consumption (Studies 2 and 3). Findings Study 1 shows that pure altruism is associated with recycling but not with green buying. Studies 2 and 3 show that pure (competitive) altruism and individualistic (collectivistic) goals lead to higher recycling (green buying) intentions. Research limitations/implications The present research extends previous findings by showing that pure and competitive are indeed associated with specific sustainable behaviors. The authors suggest that the interaction between motives and identity goals can lead to a greater impact on recycling and green buying intentions. Practical implications Public policymakers and companies will benefit by better understanding how specific combinations of altruism types and identity goals can foster recycling or green buying intentions. Originality/value This research is the first to show how matches between pure and competitive altruism types and individualistic and collectivistic identity goals affect consumers’ motivations to engage in recycling and green buying.

Materialists and altruists in a charitable donation experiment

This paper presents results from a laboratory experiment that draws on insights from economics on different incentives for generosity and insights from social psychology on different personality types. Firstly, we test whether the effect of an appeal to pure altruism versus an appeal to self-interest varies across subjects. We find that there is substantial variation, and this variation is strongly correlated with a subject’s level of materialism. Secondly, we test whether spoken appeals and written appeals have different effects. We find no evidence for such a difference. These results have important implications for charities’ fundraising strategies and for experimental design.

Introduction

This introduction is devoted to the definition of the concepts of a welfare state, social protection, and social insurance, and to the different foundations, both normative and positive, underlying them. These foundations range from pure individualistic motivations to the Kantian norm, to pure altruism. This introduction discusses also the traditional trade-off between equity and efficiency that is the main concern when designing social programs. It also presents the issues to be covered throughout the fifteen chapters of the book. Finally, it concludes with what can be viewed as the main challenge of European welfare states, namely the mounting socio-economic divide.