Altruistic Artistes, Or Egoistic Element in them?

Finding a social issue is not that difficult but mastering the skill of noticing things around can be difficult especially when one does not do that often. John mentioned about Altruism being the area he was very interested but however, he was doubtful if anyone would sponsor him. Among some of the words he said, an idea strucked and 'actors and actresses' surfaced.



This though has been bugging me since i was a young girl. Watching those mediacorp artistes performing great and dangerous stunts on and off stage, i sometimes wonder if they are doing for the good cause. Those familiar faces, are they there to increase their supports from their fans or are they really doing for the good cause? What about those artistes who did not perform? Is there really an altruistic person in Singapore? Perhaps that is too quick to judge.





There is a Cost Analysis Model of Helping that we can use to perhaps explain a little of the motives behind these artistes. Perhaps there may not be an emergency however, artistes must have been through this weighing process of the benefits and costs. This Model defines prosocial behaviour if the rewards for helping outweigh the costs of not helping.


The artistes who participated must have been altruistic, as their intentions were to help the poors and sicks. They brave swords and fire, bruises and cuts.They have a motive though, even it is altruistic, which means the desire to help another person even if it involves a cost to the helper. They may have done it to get some media attention and increase their fame, one kind of reward. Cost here could mean the effort involved, the time required, the risk of harm and perhaps the negative emotional and physiological response. However, the motive can be a prosocial one too as there is really a pure motive for helping, which one experiences events and emotions like the person experiences it.


So are we convinced of their altruism?
How about below's explanation?





Performing prosocial behaviour could due to another cost, the cost of not helping. They may feel guilty if they had not put in the effort or not perform, to touch the audiences' hearts. Not wanting to feel guilty could be a motive too. Although it was rather a selfish thought, we can see the prosocial mindset of the artistes.



That however, depends again on the individual differences. If the person by nature is empathic, they will always put themselves in other people's shoes, which is also perspective taking. They will able to show their empathic concern, imagine themselves in the situation and reflect on the degree of distress others feel. Perspective taking, empathic concern, personal distress and fantasy, are the subscales of Interpersonal reactivity index developed by Mark Davis.

so can we still say that artiste are altruistic when they perform in those charity show? It's hard to tell, but but! i'll personally say it is more of personal growth and experience that every artiste wants to have. So in the end, i think it's still egoistism rather than altruism that spurs them to perform those breathe-taking stunts.....