# Is Charity Selfish?



## GenJen54

A forer@’s post in another Culture thread got me thinking about an old proverb I am familiar with.  I believe it is Jewish in origin, but am uncertain and could not find a specific reference to it.  Paraphrasing, it is this:  _It is better to offer charity to an animal because the animal cannot give you thanks. _
_ _
That being said, it is possible for _charity_ to be truly and completely _altruistic (selfless)._  Or, do we give to others because of the feeling of “goodness” it gives to us.  If that is the case, is this not, in essence, selfish?
 
I don’t know how big charitable giving is in other countries.  In the US, it is quite popular, for tax incentive purposes if for no other.  
 
What do you think?  What is the attitude towards charitable giving in your country?  Is it possible to be charitable without being selfish?


----------



## whatonearth

There is a theory that there is no truly altruistic human act (an act the ONLY benefits someone/something else and does not give the 'giver' ANY benefits in any way) and that we are essentially and fundamentally selfish. For example, if we give to charity most of us feel a sense of fulfillment/goodness therefore we do not derive no benefit from the act and so it is at least _partially_ selfish, as you have pointed out above.

As sad as it may be I believe that there is an element of truth in this because if you think about it there are very few things we do that we receive NO benefits from (no matter how 'insignificant') that benefits others...hmm...


----------



## Laia

Well, I think that everything we do is selfish, as whatonearth said in the post above.

But I also think that being selfish is NOT always a bad thing. Why? It can be a good thing! If you give money to people who need it, it doesn't matter you do it for selfishness, the important thing is that these people now maybe could eat something, for example.


----------



## Roi Marphille

I'm not sure. I guess I don't think it this way. I actually donate monthly to a World-known International Aid Organization. When they send the magazine, I like to think that a tiny part of what they are doing is being done with my little contribution. I don't think about taxes. 
I think we feel better if our help is worthy for certain people who need it. I like to believe that. Is that being selfish? well, maybe it is. 
I also have like a moral imperative which bears me to donate; I consider myself very lucky so I feel that it's like an obligation for me to give some money to the people who could not have the access to oportunities that I had. 
Anyway, I don't think being selfish is bad in this case. I don't mind it either. It's a personal decision, isn't it?
I'm not utting a critic word to the ones who donate for taxing purposes. If they give money, it's good for some. We understand, or at least we want to understand that that money is well invested in its primal goals. 
and...good for Bill! everybody is critic with the guy but not everybody (rich people) is donating *that* money.


----------



## Fernando

I think many people donates either for feeling better or for feeling better than the people they donate to.

But most people donates for altruistic reasons. They just think it is its obligation (as Roi) and a way of "behaving good". 

As I said in other posts, I think many of these people are being "good people" without a real awareness about if they should do it. They just "feel better" or do it "from their guts", when they should think more why and whom they donate. But this a minor problem to me.

About the tax topic: I do not know none who earns money when donating. As most they can choose if giving their money to the State or to charitable organizations, but I do not know none who ends the process with more money.

In Spain the State "forgives" you a mere 15% of the donated money. So you lose, at best, 85%.


----------



## Roi Marphille

Fernando said:
			
		

> In Spain the State "forgives" you a mere 15% of the donated money. So you lose, at best, 85%.


yep, and I bet that many people don't even claim for that 15%.


----------



## Laia

Fernando said:
			
		

> But most people donates for altruistic reasons. They just think it is its obligation (as Roi) and a way of "behaving good".


 
I don't want to be "pesada" but I think that:
- donate because you want to feel good, it's selfish because you do it to feel good. (I'm not saying that being selfish it's a bad feature!!)
- donate because you think it's your obligation, it's the same as donate to avoid guilty feelings, so the same as to donate to feel good with yourself.

I don't see the difference. Nothing else.


----------



## Roi Marphille

Laia said:
			
		

> - donate because you think it's your obligation, it's the same as donate to avoid guilty feelings, so the same as to donate to feel good with yourself.


Yes, agree here. I guess many do it to avoid these guilty feelings. 
Even though I wouldn't dare to say that it should be an _social obligation_ for "middle-classers" to donate. It's just a personal option for some and that's it. I wouldn't push anybody to do it mentioning that it should be an obligation. I wouldn't push anybody for any reason anyway.


----------



## Fernando

Actually, you currently compulsory donates your money to poor people. A big amount of my money goes to pensioners, unemployers and Social Security.

Another part goes for charitative institutions through subsidies to NGOs and 3rd World Assistance. 

I assume you refer to the money beyond the tax level. I think it IS a moral obligation and SHOULD BE a social obligation. Obviously when not damaging your personal/family state.


----------



## Laia

Roi Marphille said:
			
		

> Yes, agree here. I guess many do it to avoid these guilty feelings.
> Even though I wouldn't dare to say that it should be an _social obligation_ for "middle-classers" to donate. It's just a personal option for some and that's it. I wouldn't push anybody to do it mentioning that it should be an obligation. I wouldn't push anybody for any reason anyway.


 
Ok.
But I have to say (as a person with a terribly sense of guilt, in general) that most of the times people feel guilty is not because others push us to do things... is not necessary. Most of the times the "guilty feeling" comes from inside of yourself. I mean, when we are children, and we socialize, we learn in which situations we have to feel guilty and in wich situations we have to feel proud, etc etc. These kinds of emotions that we learn in our childhood, push us to do this kind of things.


----------



## *Cowgirl*

> I also have like a moral imperative which bears me to donate; I consider myself very lucky so I feel that it's like an obligation for me to give some money to the people who could not have the access to oportunities that I had.


 
I also feel blessed. When the tsunami hit, I felt blessed that I wasn't in it, so I helped those who were less fortunate. 

I personally don't think humans can do anything that is _completely _selfless. Wether we know it our not, we usually have an alterior motive for everything, though sometimes only subconsciously. It's really quite frightening if you really think about it.


----------



## Fernando

We are carrying too far the altruist paradox.

In a way you are right. Nothing is completely and purely altruistic. But I am not so strict. To me something is altruistic if the giver is not having as his principal aim to receive an inmediate payment or a inadequate relief of conscience.

You demand absolute selflessness (Eng?). That is crazy. If I give money and:

- I do not expect payment.
- I do not feel better.
- I do not feel relief.
- I do not feel is my obligation to unfortunated people.
...

Why in the hell I am giving money?


----------



## Like an Angel

A beloved friend of mine once told me "everything we do is becuase of our interests on it", I said "NO!!"... but then I realised that she was right... so, I wouldn't call it selfish but self-interest, a good one of course!!


----------



## Papalote

Hi,

Well, I`m going to have to play devil`s advocate  here.

My belief is that there is good in people, pure good,  and that we need to express that good, perhaps in a parallel way (I was going to say, in the same way, but ..mm.. not exactly) in which we express bad feelings (anger, etc.). One way in which we want to express that good is charity, perhaps because we have been taught so? I have seen acts of goodness that came from the being. I would call them acts of Charity, where Charity equals Love (the old traditional Catholic meaning of Charity). Perhaps some would call that compassion.

Selfishness would be when we consciously do something nice, or kind, or good, only because we want to feel that we are an okay person, or better, a kind person, a good person. True charity comes when our feelings of compassion, or love, impel us to act.

What I want to say is that when we go to sleep we don`t consciously do so because we want to rest. We go to sleep because we are sleepy, we eat because we are hungry. So, okay, let me see if I can explain this, we do good (in whatever shape) because good exists, because it is and because we can do it. And in doing good, we change someone`s life. (even if it is one meal, or one touch or one smile while we give the money - o boy! I`m even confusing myself!  )

I personally do not donate money to Centraide (World something in the USA). I donate my time, expertise and knowledge to people who do not have my skills but who need them to start a business, for example. Or I will listen to somebody`s problems so they can themselves see them for what they are (lucky I am not a psychologist, eh? I really cannot explain myself in the appropriate jargon  , so I hope I am not confusing all of you!).

Well, so much for my 2 cents, and thanks for letting me ramble on.

Papalote


----------



## ampurdan

There's no paradox. Some kind of selfishness is involved in every act we perform... Though I think there are some in which selfishness has a little role: when you fulfill your duty only because it is your duty and you know it, not because you will feel bad if you don't or good if you do... That does not look neither selfish nor generous... I think this is, at least, imaginable... Though a little cold and robotic too, but quite fair.


----------



## lsp

I happen to feel good when I donate to charity, it's a nice fringe benefit that I experience when I do something I know, think and feel to be my moral obligation. I don't do it expressly for the purpose of making myself feel good. And yet I feel good. Is that selfish?


----------



## ampurdan

I would say that if the fact that you feel good has no influence in your decision to donate, ther would we no trace of selfishness in your act... But I think what's important is that you have fulfiled with your duty, even if the reason that made you donate had been that good feeling, because there's no harm in it.

When you do something to a person just because you want him/her to feel good, are you selfish? It's the same case. Now I see that there may be many cases in which we are not selfish...


----------



## lauranazario

GenJen54 said:
			
		

> That being said, it is possible for _charity_ to be truly and completely _altruistic (selfless)._  Or, do we give to others because of the feeling of “goodness” it gives to us.  If that is the case, is this not, in essence, selfish?
> 
> I don’t know how big charitable giving is in other countries.  In the US, it is quite popular, for tax incentive purposes if for no other.


Interesting and thought-provoking.  

Let me address the first part first.

I believe in making charitable donations, as in giving used clothes to Goodwill or donating canned goods for the USPS food drive, etc. The act of donating articles allows me to contribute to what I believe is a worthy cause, and this makes me feel like part of a collaborative effort. That, in turn, makes me feel _good_. I feel good in not throwing still usable clothes in the garbage; I feel good in sharing the contents of my pantry with the less fortunate.... but I can't say that I donate JUST to feel good about myself --no way!!! I don't regard my ability/willingness to donate as a self-pat in the back. It's not a "reward mechanism" (at least not in my case).

Now to the second part...

A couple of years ago I had a "good" year in terms of freelance earnings. Life had treated me well and I thought it would be good karma to share my "extra wealth"... so I gave a bit of that money to charities. I made 10 small donations (Red Cross, Heart Association, UNICEF, a religious charity in Texas, local charities as well). I was a happy gal.

BUT... then I began getting more and more requests from charities in the mail! Requests from faraway little-known organizations that had never approached me before! Then I realized that my donations landed my name on 10 _mailing lists_... and my experience in marketing reminded me that mailings lists are bought and sold worldwide. I had expected future "attempts" at continued donations from the 10 original orgs... but I had foolishly forgotten about mailing list brokerage-- one of the tools of the professional (and lucrative) charity market. 

Another thing that also stopped me from donating to organized charities was the increasingly lavish and bulky mailing pieces (weighing more--requiring extra postage) stuffed with premium items I kept receiving from this one "missionary" church group. They sent me little calendars, small devotionals,  even pre-printed address labels (with my name and address on them) for my personal use! These premium items are NOT cheap... and the number and variety of 'gifts' also bothered me --to the point of thinking "_does ANY of the donated money even make it to the needy or does it only go to pay for this unrequested material?_" I never sent them anything else... and after a while their well-wishing 'gifts' stopped coming. I guess they finally realized I did not represent a good return on their investment.

Needless to say I stopped donating money --cold turkey.
Now I'm trying other approaches as to how to be good to others.

Saludos,
LN


----------



## mnzrob

When you donate to charity you're doing something good, because you're helping other people. Obviously this is going to make you feel good, because it IS good. If you wanted to be altruistic, you wouldn't be able to do anything, because you get something from everything you do. Doctors would have to stop charging patients, and they wouldn't be allowed to care about the condition of their patients, because getting satisfaction out of seeing a patient's condition improve would be selfish. You would have to eat foods that only contain the necessary vitamins and minerals for your daily diet, without regard to taste, but you wouldn't necessarily eat till you're full, because you would receive satisfaction from that. And so on, and so on. Point is, who cares if donating to charity is selfish, because, while the satisfaction you feel may be selfish, you are also helping others, which is not selfish.

Rob


----------



## ampurdan

Why should I refrain from doing something because it is selfish? Why does selfishness have such bad press? Does anybody remember that our capitalistic system is based basically on selfishness, if Mr. Adam Smith is worth your consideration?


----------



## Kelly B

I, too, disagree with the tacit assumption behind the question, that achieving fulfillment or a pleasant feeling inside is inappropriate as a motive, that this is selfishness, and that charity resulting from such a motive is therefore tainted.

I view selfishness as _behaviors_, not feelings, that advance your own interests to the exclusion or the detriment of others.


----------



## panjandrum

We are using the word selfish, which sounds very negative.

Is there anything I choose to do that does not have any positive value to me?
I suspect not.
So if I feel good because of giving to charity, I shouldn't feel bad about that 



I understand lauranazario's point about the mailing lists and the charities' promotional material.  I find this distasteful too.  It is always possible (in the UK) to check a charity's accounts to see what percentage of their income is spent on administration and promotion.  Picking a couple of those that bombard me at random this percentage ranges from 19% to 32%.


----------



## Roi Marphille

panjandrum said:
			
		

> It is always possible (in the UK) to check a charity's accounts to see what percentage of their income is spent on administration and promotion. Picking a couple of those that bombard me at random this percentage ranges from 19% to 32%.


wow! 32% is a lot!
I think you can check the accounts of all serious Organizations of any country. I've just checked mine (it's actually a big one) in the Internet. Their percentage for promotion is 15%. At least this is what they say.


----------



## nycphotography

Roi Marphille said:
			
		

> When they send the magazine, I like to think that a tiny part of what they are doing is being done with my little contribution.
> [...]
> I think we feel better if our help is worthy for certain people who need it. I like to believe that. Is that being selfish? well, maybe it is.


 
Therein lies the selfish motivation. But the obstacle to embracing our own selfishness tends to be a cultural and a linquisitc one.

Cultures assign value judements (positive or negative) to words, which we then use to describe ourselves and others. We tend to pick descriptive language that also correlates with how we judge what we are describing. But the fact is most words have synonyms that convey the opposite judgement!!!

Only by removing the judgement from the word, can we fully accept the complete truth of them.

Giving IS selfish. Deliciously, delightfully, humanly selfish. We get to enjoy the feelings it evokes, to savor the experience, to live that part of our lives.

Is it good or bad? I offer that it's neither, but that that particular dichotomy is the source of many a delightful or tragic irony, both in life and in literature!

I don't know that 100.00% of everything in life is selfish, but I don't think it really matters either. It's the biological foundation of our wiring, and as such, the goal really has to be the enlightenment which we can bring to our own selfishenss, to reduce the polarization of good and bad so that we can live in the middle accepting both. That way when our GOOD deeds go ironically BAD, it will be far less tragic for us (as well as far less sublime for those who are rooting against us).


----------



## blancalaw

First I don’t understand why people with loads of money make donations just to fit in a lower tax bracket.  The money they donate is always greater than the amount they save on taxes.
I personally like to help others out of compassion.  If I see someone is in need and I can help them, I feel like since I have been blessed, I am required to bless others who have not been blessed.  “To those much is given, much is required.”  It also makes you feel good knowing that you helped someone.  This happiness only comes from helping others, not from anything you could buy.


----------

