I wonder sometimes how you judge a charitable act to be charitable. In other words if I perform an act of charity and good comes of it then the world is a better place. However, what if my motivations were self-centered or my motivations were to gain notoriety, fame, ego gratification, gain some reward,etc.? Does the act still constitute a charitable act? Am I demonstrating charity?
I have to state "yes" for the recipient and "no" for myself. I am starting to realize that charity is a two way street. Not only does the recipient benefit, but you benefit as well from the act in many different ways.
I argue that if the intention is to gratify ego/pride or gain status/reward based, then we do not really receive the benefit of the action. However, if the act was self-less, or given in the spirit of honestly trying to benefit the recipient then I would state that that is a true act of charity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Example situation #1:
A car manufacturer donates millions of dollars to children's hospital but the hospital has to rename an area in the hospital to the name of the car manufacturer so that everyone who enters knows that it was donated by the manufacturer.
Is that a true charitable act?
I believe it is not, because the manufacturer is seeking the reward of status and recognition which are selfish, and not selfless.
How about this example:
A homeless guy hangs out at the corner, and a business man on his way to work sees the homeless man shivering in the cold. Seeing the suffering, the business man take the homeless man into a restaurant, feeds the man, then gives him his coat. The business man leaves returns home from work telling no one of his act, and having been seen by no one who recognized him, with out his coat and minus money spent buying the homeless man food. The business man now feels happy that he was able to relieve the suffering of the homeless man.
Is that real charity?
I think it is. Purely on the fact that the business man was selfless in his actions.
Post a Comment