Arent there days when you really want to do some good to the society? When you feel the pain of the people around you and want to contribute to the society? I am sure everyone of us has been in such a state before.
Now, imagine yourself to be in such a situation. You see a hungry beggar sitting on the pavment, two steps from you. You offer him the sandwich that you were about to eat. Good deed done, right?
If you had paid for it, indeed. But consider if someone else had paid for it. Then, would it be morally correct for you to give away the sandwich? If you did not have a mandate to give off something you did not own, isnt that wrong on your part to transfer it to someone else?
If you think that its ok to give the sandwich even when you did not own it, think how this can be extended. I could give off anything to anyone even if I dont have a thing. So potentially I could transfer all of Mukesh Ambani's wealth and give it off to my friendly neighbourhood beggar and feel happy for myself that I did a good job today. Or, I could give off all his money to the poor guy that I am, and feel proud of myself.
Charity makes sense only when you can own it up to youself.
Btw, all this money transfers should statestically lead to an equilibrium where every member has the same amount of money. Though this would be extremely unstable as people will like to have a bit more than others which would give them some advantage. Hence to maintain that equilibrium, an external force has to be applied. And now it appears that I am talking about communist governments. Ah, the digressions mind takes, from charity to communism!
Now, imagine yourself to be in such a situation. You see a hungry beggar sitting on the pavment, two steps from you. You offer him the sandwich that you were about to eat. Good deed done, right?
If you had paid for it, indeed. But consider if someone else had paid for it. Then, would it be morally correct for you to give away the sandwich? If you did not have a mandate to give off something you did not own, isnt that wrong on your part to transfer it to someone else?
If you think that its ok to give the sandwich even when you did not own it, think how this can be extended. I could give off anything to anyone even if I dont have a thing. So potentially I could transfer all of Mukesh Ambani's wealth and give it off to my friendly neighbourhood beggar and feel happy for myself that I did a good job today. Or, I could give off all his money to the poor guy that I am, and feel proud of myself.
Charity makes sense only when you can own it up to youself.
Btw, all this money transfers should statestically lead to an equilibrium where every member has the same amount of money. Though this would be extremely unstable as people will like to have a bit more than others which would give them some advantage. Hence to maintain that equilibrium, an external force has to be applied. And now it appears that I am talking about communist governments. Ah, the digressions mind takes, from charity to communism!
Posts
3 comments:
hey einstein......time is always relative :).....i wud like to say that ethics wil always remain in its place but after some time the sensibility of ethics vanishes
Good one buddy..except..sandwich is not spelt sandwitch
My bad, totally dude. Corrected it. Btw, glad that you like it.
Post a Comment