i think the defenition classically used by philosophers to classify all virtues, require that the virtouos be human.
dogs and insects follow thier instincts and training.
but humans! ahh... humans. we do what we do because we want to.

i wonder about altrusim.
Standing up for your little society may be brave, defending your people, clan and ideology may be virtuous, but you do gain.

there may be cost, but you do end up with compensasion. even in death your country ideology and street gang can march on to conquor others.

to save a stranger at cost to yourself may qualify as altruism, but in that case it would get quickly weeded out of the population.

my question, is, true altruism (if it can indeed exist) wold not last long. as others will take advantage of it and the altruists will be no more.

Animals, and insects, all benefit greatly from their altruistic behavior, no hive insect can survive alone.
and dogs are territorial and will defend their packs territory, even at cost of danger to themselves. but then i came across this
news.bbc.co.uk

interesting.

so the dog is clearly not benefiting from caring for these lamb ( maybe it's just saving them for dinner when they get bigger?)
bt, the behavior is clearly very important fora dog to have. this is the same behavior that will lead it to care for it's own puppies after all.

maybe altruism is the same in humans? misplaced instincts?
caring for your own gets generalized into caring for others?



....
honestly, i think it's just saving them for later. the way a squirrel puts some nuts away for after winter. this dog is probably thinking (when they get big enough i'll invite a few friends over and we'll paaaaarrtty! )