Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Have you donated to Haiti yet? watch

  • View Poll Results: Have you donated to Haiti yet?
    Yes
    73
    33.03%
    No
    148
    66.97%

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    No, not because its not a worthwile cause, because it is, I just dont trust charities with my money. Ive done quite a lot of first hand charity work in my time, (ie heading of to India this summer for a few months to teach English) and let me tell you, most of what you donate to Oxfam wont actually reach the people in need. It all gets consumed in bureaucracy. There is enough aid in Haiti anyway, tones of it. Its just not being distributed well, and guess why, bureaucracy. mountains of forms to fill in before they can even leave the airbase.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    me and my dad and 3 other peole all won 100 quid together at the pub quiz and we donated it to the cause
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bysshe)
    Yes, but we do have newspapers and reports on the TV, and unless you're living under a rock, it's impossible not to see the photos and read the stories from Haiti. I accept that different people are moved by different things, but if you read about children in Haiti who have lost their relatives, homes and are starving and yet you remain unmoved and are happy to admit that you don't care, personally I do think you're seriously lacking in empathy. If I had to choose between saving a family member and saving someone in Haiti I've never met, of course I'd choose the family member, but no one's forcing us to make that choice. It's not about choosing one over the other (family member over Haitian, England over Haiti).
    It was a hypothetical situation. What I was trying to illustrate (badly, I admit) was that your opinion that someone claiming not to care about a far-off disaster renders them devoid of empathy is pretty unfounded. This idea that someone has a duty to help people beyond their inner circle is a relatively recent notion; it's simply not part of human nature to be unselfish, nor is it to think that this is "depressing" (I'm speaking from a biological perspective, here). In the past, empathy has been restricted to caring within a small unit, essentially to prolong survival, so someone who, for instance, chooses not to donate to Haiti because they "don't care" is not any less empathetic than you, they are simply not prescribing to the modern idea of "empathy".

    (Original post by d123)
    That's what empathy is though, identifying with, and by extension, caring about the feelings and misfortunes of others, whether or not you know them. So while it doesn't make you necessary incapable of empathy, I would say that it shows a remarkable lack of empathy.
    See above.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Nah. Not even shalked, moved or cared about this disaster. I dunno why!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chebanana)
    It was a hypothetical situation. What I was trying to illustrate (badly, I admit) was that your opinion that someone claiming not to care about a far-off disaster renders them devoid of empathy is pretty unfounded. This idea that someone has a duty to help people beyond their inner circle is a relatively recent notion; it's simply not part of human nature to be unselfish, nor is it to think that this is "depressing" (I'm speaking from a biological perspective, here). In the past, empathy has been restricted to caring within a small unit, essentially to prolong survival, so someone who, for instance, chooses not to donate to Haiti because they "don't care" is not any less empathetic than you, they are simply not prescribing to the modern idea of "empathy".



    See above.
    I disagree. The only reason that in the past empathy may have 'been restricted to caring within a small unit' is that before world media, people wouldn't have known about things like this. It's due to the media that we hear about things like this. I'm sure that in the past if people had heard about disasters they would have felt empathy, it's only due to the inability to spread such news that this may not have happened
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No because I don't care
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chebanana)
    It was a hypothetical situation. What I was trying to illustrate (badly, I admit) was that your opinion that someone claiming not to care about a far-off disaster renders them devoid of empathy is pretty unfounded. This idea that someone has a duty to help people beyond their inner circle is a relatively recent notion; it's simply not part of human nature to be unselfish, nor is it to think that this is "depressing" (I'm speaking from a biological perspective, here). In the past, empathy has been restricted to caring within a small unit, essentially to prolong survival, so someone who, for instance, chooses not to donate to Haiti because they "don't care" is not any less empathetic than you, they are simply not prescribing to the modern idea of "empathy".
    If you want to look at it from a rational, biological perspective then no, there's no reason why we should care. But I like to think that people are generally are a bit more complex than that and can think outside their immediate family group. Things may have been different in the past, but if empathising with people on the other side of the world is just a modern thing, then may be we are moving in a more sophisticated, less selfish direction, even if that's not the impression I get reading this thread....

    I don't think we have a "duty" to donate, and my problem isn't with the people who aren't donating. I'm just appalled by how so many people are happy to admit that they don't care at all. Perhaps these people aren't incapable of empathy - I'm sure they'd be upset by the deaths of their friends or family members - but they're seriously lacking in empathy if they really find it that hard to empathise with Haitians. And that's something that really disturbs me. Actually, I was surprised at how much this thread upset me - the callousness of some of the posts is more shocking than anything else I've seen on the internet for a while. Maybe that's just me and my strange, "modern" empathy, but oh well...

    edit:

    (Original post by d123)
    I disagree. The only reason that in the past empathy may have 'been restricted to caring within a small unit' is that before world media, people wouldn't have known about things like this. It's due to the media that we hear about things like this. I'm sure that in the past if people had heard about disasters they would have felt empathy, it's only due to the inability to spread such news that this may not have happened
    That's a good point.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bysshe)
    but if empathising with people on the other side of the world is just a modern thing, then may be we are moving in a more sophisticated, less selfish direction, even if that's not the impression I get reading this thread....
    Well, I think both you and I know that's not true, in essence, humans are no more sophisticated than we were thousands of years ago, we just have more stuff. Less selfish? We've always been selfish...

    I don't think we have a "duty" to donate, and my problem isn't with the people who aren't donating. I'm just appalled by how so many people are happy to admit that they don't care at all. Perhaps these people aren't incapable of empathy - I'm sure they'd be upset by the deaths of their friends or family members - but they're seriously lacking in empathy if they really find it that hard to empathise with Haitians.
    It's not nice, I agree, but again I think today's expectation of empathy is a bit optimistic when you look at how humans really function.

    (Original post by d123)
    I disagree. The only reason that in the past empathy may have 'been restricted to caring within a small unit' is that before world media, people wouldn't have known about things like this. It's due to the media that we hear about things like this. I'm sure that in the past if people had heard about disasters they would have felt empathy, it's only due to the inability to spread such news that this may not have happened
    Really? Then why are all these friendly, educated and well-informed TSRians saying they couldn't care less? Like I said, the fact that they believe this despite knowing the facts proves that this expectation of empathy is not integral to human nature.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chebanana)
    Really? Then why are all these friendly, educated and well-informed TSRians saying they couldn't care less? Like I said, the fact that they believe this despite knowing the facts proves that this expectation of empathy is not integral to human nature.
    They are just showing a lack of empathy, like I said. I was responding to you saying that empathy has nothing to do with Haiti.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by d123)
    They are just showing a lack of empathy, like I said. I was responding to you saying that empathy has nothing to do with Haiti.
    I didn't say empathy had nothing to do with Haiti :confused: I was just making the case for the concept of empathy not actually corresponding to human nature and therefore judging others as "incapable" or even "lacking" in empathy because they don't care about Haiti being mistaken as you're expecting humans to correspond to an unnatural idea.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chebanana)
    I didn't say empathy had nothing to do with Haiti :confused: I was just making the case for the concept of empathy not actually corresponding to human nature and therefore judging others as "incapable" or even "lacking" in empathy because they don't care about Haiti being mistaken as you're expecting humans to correspond to an unnatural idea.
    Fine, you implied it then.

    I completely disagree with you anyway, I think it is human nature to feel empathy for people; if not, then why are so many people donating? I think feeling empathy for fellow humans is one of the duties (duties is the wrong word, but I can't think of a word that encapsulates what I mean) of being human. Without it, we're just looking out for ourselves, what some people call number one, and that's an attitude I despise. Fine, don't donate money if you don't want to, but if you genuinely aren't moved at all by the suffering of people in different countries, and I'm not just talking Haiti here, then I can't understand that at all.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by d123)
    Fine, you implied it then.

    I completely disagree with you anyway, I think it is human nature to feel empathy for people; if not, then why are so many people donating?
    Because society tells us it's the right thing to do?

    I think feeling empathy for fellow humans is one of the duties (duties is the wrong word, but I can't think of a word that encapsulates what I mean) of being human. Without it, we're just looking out for ourselves, what some people call number one, and that's an attitude I despise.
    I've addressed this at length...but you shouldn't assume that I like this attitude, I don't. Unfortunately, it's just the way we are.

    Fine, don't donate money if you don't want to, but if you genuinely aren't moved at all by the suffering of people in different countries, and I'm not just talking Haiti here, then I can't understand that at all.
    I'm not donating because I know my money will be swallowed by a huge corporation instead of actually helping anyone. Please don't assume I'm not affected by all this, I was just making an observation about what I thought was an unfair and mistaken remark on bysshe's part in regards to people who aren't donating because they don't care.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    On Monday I'M gonna play a concert with a band I formed. The concert is a charity concert for the victims in Haiti
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No and I don't bloody care to be honest Haiti is better off as a ******* crater when their not all pinned under buildings screaming for money they are gunning down each other as it is pretty much the crime capital of the carribean in a way its better off just rebuild it and they can make money through mass on location shoots of Most Haunted in Haiti
    A typical example of why aid is dumb. e.g.
    There's a tap on some concrete
    English Journalist says; We have found a survivor but oh wait whats this?
    Mumbled cries of pinned child; £10!
    English Journalist; Oh wait she needs £10 to live if not she dies
    Child is rescued 2 weeks later dies of chollaria
    THE END
    a sick yet honest view because when said people are rescued they DIE anyway of diesease

    I'm heartless don't care and to be honest its nice to see a bit of chaos. Hopefully no animals died though that would be tragic but at least the dogs have a good innings
    Haiti Future Capital of the Dog Hybrids
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    No. I haven't and won't. Firstly, the government is donating on my behalf, so technically we've all donated already. Secondly, if I don't donate to charity in the UK as it is, why should I donate because it's foreign needs?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Nope, I need all the money I can get.

    17 is an age in which you need a lot of money for school equipment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I believe this will be the only time I ever agree with rush limbaugh but I already paid in the form of UK income tax.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I'm genuinely shocked at how a lot of people on this thread think it's completely normal and justified not to give a crap about anyone but themselves. That it's normal not to feel any compassion whatsoever about terrible suffering.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    I'm genuinely shocked at how a lot of people on this thread think it's completely normal and justified not to give a crap about anyone but themselves. That it's normal not to feel any compassion whatsoever about terrible suffering.
    There's a difference between empathising with their problems and actually donating.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .ACS.)
    There's a difference between empathising with their problems and actually donating.
    I know. I'm talking about the people who have literally said they don't care.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.