And, I think that enlarging one's sphere of interest is a good thing. Seemingly people do agree with this from what posts I gather, perhaps exempt Sir2u. — Posty McPostface

And just where did I say that I was in disagreement with enlarging ones sphere of interest?

LOL! The help I received enabled me to go to college and get a well-paying job and pay lots of taxes. — Relativist

You are duly excused then. Feel free to keep on wanking without government handouts. :cool:

Why do I need to widen my sphere of interest? — Sir2u

That's not what I asked. I asked how you can be satisfied with things as they are, which is one way of interpreting your remark that you're not sure whether there is more to be done.

As I have already stated, I do try to help when it is possible. — Sir2u

That suggests that you believe that there are people who need help. So, why did you say that you're not sure whether there is more to be done?

What is the "this" that you refer to? — Sir2u

The current state of things in terms relevant to what we're discussing - politically, ethically, economically, socially, culturally. The status quo.

Do you honestly expect me or anyone else to provide any other kind of evidence. — Sir2u

Do you honestly believe that that would be such an outlandish expectation? There is probably data out there, and this is a philosophy forum after all.

I am not even sure it could be called evidence because it is not used to prove any point. — Sir2u

Why bring up an anecdote relating to the topic in this context if your intention wasn't for it to be considered as evidence towards some kind of point relevant to the topic? We're not down the pub, you know.

But we all know that you use non standard definitions most of the time, so I will just ignore it.

Who gives a shit what you believe.

Or maybe you don't understand what I said. — Sir2u

Ah. I wondered how long it would take before you resorted to that level of response. Better cut it off here then.

Given a utilitarian rationale, yes. If the money is spent on bettering the lives of other people, instead of starting wars or such. — Posty McPostface

Are the other peoples lives in need of bettering because they don't want to work, or because they have so many kids that they have to stay home and look after them.
Would it be moral to give money to both?

starving children dosent want the bible, they want water, leave the bible at home. — Aleksander Kvam

So why did you quote from it then? :worry:

bitter crank

im still trying to learn...so I mess up sometime :)

No, I have not heard of them before. After looking at their webpage, I find it incredible that all of their branches are in developed counties. Maybe that is why they manage to do some good. I don't know if they work in the third world countries but if they do they are probably not have much success. — Sir2u

The skills required to take care of people in developed countries (like the US) are quite different than the skills needed to help people in 3rd world countries. In East Africa, or Central America, for instance, a central task is "building capacity" in communities -- teaching people how to manage sanitation problems, increasing garden crop yields, building community knowledge of health, training low-level health workers, improving education resources, and the like.

The problems of the very poor in very wealthy countries revolve around family dysfunction, drugs and alcohol, mental illness, and a poverty of public services to address them. Anyone who falls off "the social ladder" and ends up homeless on the street always has a very poor chance of re-establishing themselves without outside intervention. The distance from the gutter to the first rung of the ladder is too high for most people to leap.

I knew a delightful woman who was a music teacher who had had a good career; she fell on hard times (no alcohol, drugs, or MI -- just misfortune) and came very close to being homeless. Lutheran Social Services helped her out with housing, and this made the critical difference. She was able to put things back together after that.

The homeless drunk or homeless uncared for mental patient has far greater need than the music teacher. There are a whole group of agencies: Catholic Charities, Lutheran Social Services, Salvation Army, county hospitals, social welfare agencies, and the like who provide assistance to people in severe need. There are also small groups from all sorts of backgrounds that do the same thing on a smaller scale.

That's not what I asked. I asked how you can be satisfied with things as they are, which is one way of interpreting your remark that you're not sure whether there is more to be done. — Sapientia

Now that I know what you are talking about.

The current state of things in terms relevant to what we're discussing - politically, ethically, economically, socially, culturally. The status quo. — Sapientia

I have not stated that I am in anyway satisfied with any of the situations you stated here. I am not even discussing those topics. We are talking about the morality of giving money to people that are unknown to us as opposed to giving it to those we know.

That suggests that you believe that there are people who need help. So, why did you say that you're not sure whether there is more to be done? — Sapientia

No it does not suggest any such thing. It states that I help the people that I know need help. It implies nothing at all about people I don't know except that I do not know if there is anything I can do to help them.

Do you honestly believe that that would be such an outlandish expectation? There is probably data out there, and this is a philosophy forum after all. — Sapientia

So if you are interested in anything more that anecdotal evidence why don't you provide us with some.

Of course it could be called evidence. It would be evidence. What are you talking about? And the relevant point would obviously be whether or not most people help others to the extent that they are able. — Sapientia

So which was the statement I made that required the evidence you said I gave?

Ah. I wondered how long it would take before you resorted to that level of response. Better cut it off here then. — Sapientia

If you don't like honest, that sucks. Get used to it.

And just where did I say that I was in disagreement with enlarging ones sphere of interest? — Sir2u

Oh, sorry that I misinterpreted you here.

Are the other peoples lives in need of bettering because they don't want to work, or because they have so many kids that they have to stay home and look after them.
Would it be moral to give money to both? — Sir2u

Isn't that irrelevant? I don't know of any welfare kings or queens. Besides, if one were to address the issue of people scrounging off of welfare, then that's a small minority, I think.

Long time ago I work for one of those British charities here. I saddened me to see the scandals that are coming out of the dark places and eating away at the good they did.

But there is hardly a day passes when there is not another scandal from the churches (all inclusive) coming to light.

Isn't that irrelevant? — Posty McPostface

Not if it is someone of them that is asking you for money. Would you really give someone money if you thought that they did not deserve it. If you had plenty, maybe. But not many of us have plenty to be giving away.

Besides, if one were to address the issue of people scrounging off of welfare, then that's a small minority, I think. — Posty McPostface

It is basically the same thing as asking a stranger for money, only they have to fill in forms. Is it moral for them to do so? Are they in need because not enough people have expanded spheres of interest?

Good night ladies and gentlemen, you too Sapientia.

Sleep tight everyone.

Well, you gotta start somewhere. And, I think that enlarging one's sphere of interest is a good thing. Seemingly people do agree with this from what posts I gather, perhaps exempt Sir2u. — Posty McPostface

If only people's voting better reflected that. In the last general election, around 800,000 more people here voted for the Tories than Labour, and the Tories won 56 more seats, winning them the election, despite their awful manifesto, which included, for example, snatching away free lunches for school children of a certain age from families who can "just about manage, but worry about the cost of living", and a vote on overturning the fox hunting ban.

"Yuck! We don't want hungry poor children and foxes in our sphere of interest!".

That's nothing compared to the damage Trump has done. Count your blessings over there in the UK. USA, don't care. The welfare state for the rich is too damn important to change.

That's nothing compared to the damage Trump has done. Count your blessings over there in the UK. USA, don't care. The welfare state for the rich is too damn important to change. — Posty McPostface

Good point. You needed a Sanders and we needed a Corbyn. Still do.

Good point. You needed a Sanders and we needed a Corbyn. Still do. — Sapientia

Good luck with that.

Are the other peoples lives in need of bettering because they don't want to work, or because they have so many kids that they have to stay home and look after them. — Sir2u

Straight out of the "demonizing stereotypes for use by right-wing morons" playbook. :roll:

Don't worry. He could benefit from taking a leaf out of your book.

Straight out of the "demonizing stereotypes for use by right-wing morons" playbook. :roll: — Sapientia

Asking a simple question is not and never will be demonizing. And I am neither right nor left wing anything, I leave those petty nuances to the humble minded. All politicians for me are the same. So next time read the whole post or stop taking things out of context.

Are the other peoples lives in need of bettering because they don't want to work, or because they have so many kids that they have to stay home and look after them.
Would it be moral to give money to both? — Sir2u

What I am really surprised about is that you failed to call me out on the mistakes, are you getting sloppy in your old age?

Let me point them out for you.
Apostrophe missing.
Are the other people's lives in need of bettering because they don't want to work, or because they have so many kids that they have to stay home and look after them? Question mark missing.

Or maybe you don't want to mention my mistakes because then you would have to mention other people's mistakes as well.

starving children dosent want the bible, they want water, leave the bible at home. — Aleksander Kvam

Don't worry. He could benefit from taking a leaf out of your book. — Sapientia

Yeah really, right on man.

So, nobody really answered, how does one enlarge one's sphere of interest?

Is that possible?

Maybe through empathy? I think a human-connection and interaction must be established before there is an interest for someone to help "complete strangers". The way I see it anyway...

Maybe through empathy? I think a human-connection and interaction must be established before there is an interest for someone to help "complete strangers". The way I see it anyway... — Aleksander Kvam

Yes, certainly empathy is needed. I wonder how much that can be worked on, given that it's an emotion. Is there anything that can be done rationally, that would increase one's sphere of interest?

Im not sure, but it curtainly cant be forced upon anyone. its not an obligation for anyone to be empathic.

To me its a little bit about not wanting to carry the weight of the world on my sholders. I have my own to carry. (even tho money has no emotion)

To me its a little bit about not wanting to carry the weight of the world on my shoulders. I have my one to carry. — Aleksander Kvam

Undeniably true. It's just a matter of preference then, I suppose. How much are you willing to carry and do, is a personal choice. But, since it's moral, then why not? I don't claim to be an adherent to carrying the world on my shoulders, just that if I could then why not? Is it irrational to do so? Maybe that's the issue?

To be honest, im not used to "compassion" and that is my short coming and probally the reason im not empathic enough to help. And I fear to many has it like that. But it has to start somewhere, right, if the aim is a better world for everyone?

To be honest, im not used to "compassion" and that is my short coming and probally the reason im not empathic enough to help. — Aleksander Kvam

Another important concept, 'compassion'. Thanks.

Is there so much of a difference between empathy and compassion? (To lazy to google :) )

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-clarity/201703/compassion-is-better-empathy

Interesting stuff.

https://chopra.com/articles/whats-the-difference-between-empathy-sympathy-and-compassion