This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Mindhunt on 16 September 2012 - 18:09
In light of the sometimes heated feelings regarding helping those less fortunate in our society whether it is in the form of welfare, public assistance, free clinics, etc, most of the research points to societal benefits of helping each other. Below are the easiest articles to accss via Psychology Science website, others are via PsychInfo and other databases for peer reviewed and scholarly articles for which you need a login and password....
In the March issue of Psychology Science by Cameron, D. found that when people surpress feelings of sympathy, empathy, or compassion, their beliefs are changed regarding the importance of morality and as a result generally do not endorse strict ethics.
In their August issue, they discussed the findings of Grant A. and Dutton J. in their research of how giving promotes and strengthens prosocial behavior.
Also in the August issue is Hepach R., Vaish A., and Tomasello M. article on how children as young as 2 years old are intrinsically motivated to see others being helped. This study indicates that people from a very young age are concerned with the welfare of others.
The research indicates that people and society are better off when we help each other and promote prosocial behavior. That the motivation to help each other starts in early childhood and can be changed in adulthood to a selfish elitist mindset, which has actually been proven to harm society as a whole. When people stop caring about others, it can make so much easier to violate ethics and hurt others. People who help others receive physical and mental health benefits which in turn creates a healthier society. I just found this all rather intersting.......
In the March issue of Psychology Science by Cameron, D. found that when people surpress feelings of sympathy, empathy, or compassion, their beliefs are changed regarding the importance of morality and as a result generally do not endorse strict ethics.
In their August issue, they discussed the findings of Grant A. and Dutton J. in their research of how giving promotes and strengthens prosocial behavior.
Also in the August issue is Hepach R., Vaish A., and Tomasello M. article on how children as young as 2 years old are intrinsically motivated to see others being helped. This study indicates that people from a very young age are concerned with the welfare of others.
The research indicates that people and society are better off when we help each other and promote prosocial behavior. That the motivation to help each other starts in early childhood and can be changed in adulthood to a selfish elitist mindset, which has actually been proven to harm society as a whole. When people stop caring about others, it can make so much easier to violate ethics and hurt others. People who help others receive physical and mental health benefits which in turn creates a healthier society. I just found this all rather intersting.......
by Preston on 16 September 2012 - 19:09
It's a very interesting topic and quite important to society too. I think it can relate to Maslow's hierarchy of needs. When folks are hungry and there is little law and order, basic concern for others seems to go out the window as does basic morality in many cases, suggesting than in many cases morality and charity is an economic priviledge and benefit. And at the other spectrum when folks get to the top of the corporate ladder, many seem to have become isolated, cold and uncaring towards others. Perhaps it takes this emotional coldness and controlled sociopathy to get to that level of ultimate success. And yet there are some selct of the most successful business people who are very concerned with putting value back into the commumnity and become philanthropic. Some of these philanthropists have started foundations which support various worthwhile endeavors even after their deaths.
Maybe some of the wealthy super-elites do this for the wrong motives such as public image, tax reduction strategies, etc., but there are some that are genuinely concerned that they leave the world a better place when their life is over and trulty want to help people less fortunate. And there is along history of a great deal of charity coming from church organizations in many different faiths by members who genuinely live their faith rather than just go through the motions during chuirch services.
Some poor folks see helping others as a luxury they cannot afford when they are clawing and scrapping just to survive day to day. It has been theorized that charity and benviolence is essentially a byproduct of a strong middle class which essentially developed from unionization of labor in the early 1920s and later. Some of the first true charities developed from the non-working wives of wealthy industrialists in the early 1900's who became very concerned about the general welfare of the less fortunate. Mothers and women must be credited with much of the charities we have today, perhaps a legacy of their basic ability to nurture, love and care for others.
Maybe some of the wealthy super-elites do this for the wrong motives such as public image, tax reduction strategies, etc., but there are some that are genuinely concerned that they leave the world a better place when their life is over and trulty want to help people less fortunate. And there is along history of a great deal of charity coming from church organizations in many different faiths by members who genuinely live their faith rather than just go through the motions during chuirch services.
Some poor folks see helping others as a luxury they cannot afford when they are clawing and scrapping just to survive day to day. It has been theorized that charity and benviolence is essentially a byproduct of a strong middle class which essentially developed from unionization of labor in the early 1920s and later. Some of the first true charities developed from the non-working wives of wealthy industrialists in the early 1900's who became very concerned about the general welfare of the less fortunate. Mothers and women must be credited with much of the charities we have today, perhaps a legacy of their basic ability to nurture, love and care for others.
by Micaho on 17 September 2012 - 20:09
Sorry, Mindhunt, I don't get your point other than the obvious. Of course people feel good about themselves when they are able to give. I personally don't think it depends on being wealthy, since a poor unemployed individual can volunteer at a mission, etc. But I think it should be the choice of the individual to contribute to society or one's neighbor in some way. Paying higher taxes so that the government can administer assistence programs doesn't provide the same warm fuzzy feelings. It's better for the poor of course to have a dependable source of income. But it's also too easy to say, "Let the government take care of it."
by gsdpartisan on 19 September 2012 - 15:09
Yes, charity is wonderful... There are so many worthwhile charities to choose from... Wounded Warriors, Salvation Armny, Christian & Jewish hospitals, St. Jude Hospital, local animal rescues, Shriners, Doctors without borders, Ronald McDonald House, Big brothers, Big Sisters, Toys for Tots...
I want to choose my charities... I do not want the govt taking my money (taxes) & "redistributing" it as they see fit: Solyndra, windmills, ethanol, and all the rest of the "green" boondoogles & socialist policies which have never worked anywhere or at any time in the world where they have been tried.
I want to choose my charities... I do not want the govt taking my money (taxes) & "redistributing" it as they see fit: Solyndra, windmills, ethanol, and all the rest of the "green" boondoogles & socialist policies which have never worked anywhere or at any time in the world where they have been tried.
by Two Moons on 19 September 2012 - 16:09
Giving money to organizations is a cop out, geared towards easing the individuals conscience more than benefiting any individual or society.
To be social and in order to help an individual you must physically do something helpful yourself in person.
Then there will be a true benefit to the individual, society, and yourself.
It does not have to involve money by the way.
To be social and in order to help an individual you must physically do something helpful yourself in person.
Then there will be a true benefit to the individual, society, and yourself.
It does not have to involve money by the way.
by gsdpartisan on 19 September 2012 - 18:09
"Giving money to organizations is a cop out, geared towards easing the individuals conscience more than benefiting any individual or society.
To be social and in order to help an individual you must physically do something helpful yourself in person.
Then there will be a true benefit to the individual, society, and yourself.
It does not have to involve money by the way."
No, it doesn't need to involve money, but an individual's scope of influence & authority is limited. Giving to an orgainized cause you agree with greatly enhances any contribution an individual chooses to make. It is not a cop out... It doesn't need to be either/or.
To be social and in order to help an individual you must physically do something helpful yourself in person.
Then there will be a true benefit to the individual, society, and yourself.
It does not have to involve money by the way."
No, it doesn't need to involve money, but an individual's scope of influence & authority is limited. Giving to an orgainized cause you agree with greatly enhances any contribution an individual chooses to make. It is not a cop out... It doesn't need to be either/or.
by beetree on 19 September 2012 - 18:09
Well, I couldn't disagree with Moon's more. That might be his ethos and makes sense to him, but his premise is all wrong; "Giving money to organizations is a cop out, geared towards easing the individuals conscience more than benefiting any individual or society."
It is wrong because he is projecting, which means, it is true for himself, only.
It is wrong because he is projecting, which means, it is true for himself, only.
by SitasMom on 19 September 2012 - 18:09
Today -
Stopped and helped old lady tote her trash cans back to her garage and helped stack boxes for her (didn't know her).
Helped unload a groceries from a buggy into the car of a woman who had 3 out of controll children (didn't know her).
Charity doesn't have to cost $$, there are so many ways to help!
My favorite charity is the Houston Food Bank.
I channenge everyone to "to a good turn daily."
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top