The conventional wisdom (popular belief) of virtue or kindness is that you must have good faith and exhibit certain quality of sympathy. I personally do not think that is proper and in fact im inclined to say that is wrong.
Here is how it goes. I am an utilitarian, which means I m a person of result orientation not process (though in some aspects im on the other extreme, process oriented). I think what matters is how many children in Africa fed today, not how much you care about them or how much you pity them.
A rich businessman or politician may not have sympathy or love for children in Africa, but as long as he donated a big sum of money to feed those children, that is kindness and, in fact, a lot more useful than people who are extremely kind but poor. Even if the politicians or businessmen donate money for popularity purpose (it s good for his political campaign) and not for the sake of showing sympathy for these children, I think, objectively he has done a lot more virtue than extremely kind people who are poor.
My friends argued that “but helping people is also about self-satisfaction and process…” how selfish is that argument. See? You are not helping a lot, yet you are doing it so you feel satisfied about YOURSELF!!! In religious terms (especially Christian Buddhist and Islam), this is done so you receive “pahala” or reward when you pass away. The reward in commonly associated with ticket to heaven. This shows how selfish and hypocrite people are, especially those who claim themselves to be extremely kind or just kind.
Have you ever watched Boston Legal? If you do, you will know what i am saying. I am referring to Alan Shore, an obnoxious character in those series. He is infamous for his mean and unpleasant comment to a lot of things. His unorthodox approach to many issues bring him more foes than friends. The most important part of his character is that he doesnt proclaim himself to be a kind man... He doesnt even show it... But everyone watching that shows know exactly that he is the man of integrity, the one with strongest principles of life among all characters in Boston Legal. His principle is mainly helping poor and needy people without ever telling anyone or letting anyone knows. Unlike him, most people are overrating their kindness and their contribution to public. People gave "sedekah" or small change for paupers because they want to be seen as kind and nice people in public. Muslems gave zakat fitrah because they expect the heavenly crown or in quran terms pahala
Im sometimes sick with what im living in… people often say to me be part of the solution not the problem or think positively. I said no… without people like me nobody will ever realize how corrupt they are. Im not claiming im not corrupt (in wide sense), but at least im being honest about it…
Long live hypocrisy, because human kind loves you so much!! And went I come in to tell my friends that their volunteer works in asylum or children service are useless and infinitely small, they are mad at me… Kindness is best exhibited when you have money and power, even better when you do have the sympathy and love for those you help financially.
the best deh buat membuka paradigma lo,,, bikin buku jo,,,,
ReplyDeletemenarik joe..
ReplyDeletesangat menarik..
kapan2, boleh yaa qt diskusi bareng ttg ini..
sy sangat tertarik dgn pemikiran2 harjo ttg hal ini..
so, klo nt ada waktu luang or lg ga sibuk, bilang2 yaa..
qt diskusi bareng ttg ini,, okey?..
thank you =)
-filzah-
First point, observing on absolute understanding of kindness..i do prefer to promote an action of philantrophy than a feeling by sympathy.Yes, i must say, i agree with you in term of diagreeing the wrongly interpreted notion from what the conventional wisdom says about kindness.One vote from me
ReplyDeletefor your argument at this point.but, you should mark my point to clarify people.
here it is my point :
but, then i question, when sympathy is (also) literally meant as an 'act' of contributing, helping and supporting others.dont you think that philantrophy (act of charity&donation) is actually derived from the second thought of sympathy itself.if this literal meaning is applied.the old wisdom could be right.otherwise, it is shallow wisdom..where did you find such wisdom, anyway?
regardless of this wisdom..yes, affirmative, mere visible expression of profound feeling does not make any changes.
Second point,
i am not entirely agree about your idea that expecting ticket of heaven by helping is Selfish..Are you saying that when we go to heaven by zakat or sedekah then other people will be suffered?? by means of selfishness? Justify this..Otherwise, Think Again..
let me remind you : people action is not always reflected from their pure intention.we cannot see the true intention behind what common people see from the false action or Vice Versa.Correct? then how do we know that such person (even in the Boston Legal thing) does not expect something like pahala..? remember, selfishness occurs in a situation in which a person interest is fulfilled without caring others'.it is in contradiction with the concept of zakat, sedekah or any other religious charity).further, the religions instructs them: they shall
do this with 'good intention' for helping the poor/suffered..reward is an award or appreciation from God.even, Professor, scientists, all people welcome awards Nobel (peace,chemistry,medics),Oscar,Pulitzer as reward..right? they help people, whether or not they expect reward..they have never been considered as selfish..
should we not misjudge people by what our eyes can see.
Thus,donating for a ticket of heaven is not wholly meant as Selfish act.further, my God suggested us to donate without other people awareness..a hidden charity is better.
Third point, when you said
: " their volunteer works in asylum or children service are useless and infinitely small." I do Agree with you.these people are similar with FPI community who want voluntarily join war in Palestine.such people are simply Irrational.even Palestine leaders are Not expecting them to join war.They said : we dont need such people.we only need medicine,logistics and donation.that's all."
Yes,philantropy is better than symphaty..
Fourth point, you shall compliment me this time in return.so, that you will be bestowed a reward/pahala from your God as well. . .hahahaha..
As usual,
Berhan A.
rhan.law@gmail.com
Nope i wont compliment for you for pahala, because i dont believe in that system, but i compliment you because you have read and replied to my blog and that makes me feel good. I am a person of mathematics calculation, so i dont do things for nothing (but not pahala). And i m being honest about it, unlike people i m referring to in my writing.
ReplyDeleteFirst, with regards to the definition of wisdom. My answer is i find that wisdom in daily observation of 20 years of my life. Good people are people who fulfill the criteria i laid down. It is shallow yes!! You are so damn right. Because when you refer to "conventional" you refer to common people, who are not thinkers, who are ignorant, who are SHALLOW!!! They need people like me (whom they hate) to remind them
Second, nope. If you gava zakat or sedekah and go to heaven, people wont suffer more, (NOTE) BUT PEOPLE WONT SUFFER LESS if you don’t have money and power to do it. In other words, if your zakat or sedekah is too infinitely small that wont make them suffer less. Remember the point of my argument is comparison between doing it (with bad motive) or feeling it (without considerable action). I am arguing that the former is much better than the latter. When I said selfish, this is how I build my argument. People often tell me that they are doing good things only for the sake of others. I said wait a minute, don’t be so hypocrite. You are doing it so you feel good yourselves as well. For religious people, you do it because you know that is pahala. For politicians, you do it so that public notes their kindness (good for political campaign). And btw, thanks it makes me THINK and actually comes back with better argument
Third, EXACTLY MY POINT. “PEOPLE’S ACTION IS NOT ALWAYS REFLECTED FROM THEIR PURE INTENTION” In FACT, no one does something without expecting for incentive. EXACTLY AGAIN “ HOW DO WE KNOW THAT SUCH PERSON DOES NOT EXPECTING SOMETHING LIKE PAHALA?” Alan shore is infamous for his principle, I m helping the needy so I feel good about myself. That is because he thinks he has done many bad things to justify his principle (too long to discuss his character here). But the point is I AGREE, he is doing something for selfish purpose and the most important thing is HE ADMITTED IT. HE IS NOT BEING HYPOCRITE ABOUT IT! I don’t have problem with people being selfish or self-centered. I HAVE PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE BEING HYPOCRITE ABOUT IT (title of my article).
but once again berk buddy, thanks a bunch for reading and replying. Always have nice discussion with you
hahaha..,hey the fourth point is just a Joke.complimentary for pahala is a Bad idea.i know you wont.yeah i wont do that as well.in contradiction, complimentary as honest appreciation is definitely agreeable.oh i am very picky at giving compliment..so, be grateful for this.hahahahahaha (i often laugh out loud when having quality excitement.so, it's normal.)
ReplyDeletethose shallow thinker need people like (not only you, but) US..hahaha. exactly, count me in.
indeed, hypocrisy is unacceptable at all cost.yes, the politicians/legislative candidates are suddenly becoming hyphocrites..! where have they been at the time long before general election is about to come ? i am sick of them. . .they misuse poverty and low intelligence to gain votes..
same here.i have never founded though opponent yet partner in a discussion like you before.it's true.
P.S : i read Kenshin as well.i do admire the philosophical debate during the samurai engagement.
Another quality one, i strongly recommend "Death Note" manga.Two Thumbs up japanese comic.It's somewhat complicated to decide..who is right, who is wrong, who is the hero, who is the villain..it's up to you, to choose.it comprises political, legal, moral, psychological, etimological and social matters, all mixed in a unique story.brilliant masterpiece.read it sometime.you must purchase the whole 13 books! (as if the publisher pays me for doing this)
Cheers,
Berhan A.
rhan.law@gmail.com
btw, i ve finished death note, the comics, the movie, and the cartoon.. i ve read the rules of deathnote and figured out obvious and subtle contradiction between each provision. too long to demonstrate here. but if we are watching the movies together, i can tell you which provisions are contradicting
ReplyDeletebut i think i don't want to go to heaven...
ReplyDeletewhat do you think?
Do i have to make something good if i don't want to go to heaven!
kumala
depends on you whether or not you feel like you need to do good things. i do good things because it makes me feel good about myself.(selfish, me)
ReplyDeleteGw setuju, Jo.
ReplyDeleteKekayaan adalah yang utama jika kita mau menyelamatkan sesama. Percuma jadi orang miskin karena kita tidak mungkin bisa menyejahterakan orang miskin dengan menjadi miskin juga toh?
Tapi jujur. Jangan merendahkan mereka yang bekerja di tempat-tempat yang bukan "lahan basah". Sebenarnya orang-orang seperti mereka justru orang yang lebih mulia dibandingkan orang kaya yang menyumbangkan sebagian "kecil" dari kekayaannya. Orang-orang seperti itu sebenarnya hanya mencari kepuasan belaka berupa penghormatan dari yang lain (walau bukan semua). Tapi pernahkah terpikir akan totalitas? Adakah yang berani menjual seluruh hartanya dan memberikan ke orang miskin? Hampir tidak ada. Adakah yang terpikir untuk mencari kekayaan sebanyak mungkin tapi tetap hidup sederhana? Jarang.
Pernah dengar cerita Mahatma Gandhi?
Seorang ibu tua yang sangat miskin (dan mungkin hanya mempunyai uang 1 koin saja) menyumbangkan 1 koin untuk membantu sesamanya yang miskin juga. Kamu tahu apa yang dilakukan Gandhi? Ia menuju tempat ibu itu dan menerima langsung koin itu dari tangan si ibu. Gandhi tidak menyerahkan uang itu kepada bendahara donasi melainkan menyimpannya untuk diserahkan langsung kepada orang miskin lainnya. Gandhi tidak mempercayakan 1 buah koin itu kepada Bendahara (yang notabene mengurus uang sumbangan sampai lebih dari jutaan rupee) dengan alasan: "Sesungguhnya ibu ini telah menyumbang seluruh kekayaannya dan hal ini jauh lebih berharga dari sumbangan 10 koin dari orang yang memiliki kekayaan 100 koin." (kurang lebih intinya begitu)
Proses atau hasil kedua2nya penting. Sesungguhnya gw jg ga peduli surga ada atau tidak. Itu mungkin hanya isapan jempol belaka yang dibuat agar semua orang bersikap hati2 dalam setiap tindakannya. Tapi yang jelas, selama dengan berbuat kebaikan kita bisa membuat sesama kita bahagia, apa salahnya untuk berbuat kebaikan? Apa salahnya berbuat kebaikan walaupun kita tidak memiliki apa2? Bahkan senyum kita saja bisa menjadi kebahagiaan bagi sesama.
Ada pepatah:
Jika aku tidak memiliki kekayaan untuk dibagi, aku memiliki ilmu untuk dibagi. Jika aku tidak memiliki ilmu untuk dibagi, aku memiliki senyum untuk dibagi. Jika aku tidak memiliki senyum untuk dibagi, setidaknya aku tidak membuat orang tak bahagia (yang terakhir tambahan dari gw, hwehehe)
(Maaf. Bahasa Inggris gw jelek jadi gw lebih baik pake bahasa Indonesia. Karena gw cinta Bahasa Indonesia)
PS: bukan sok bijak. Tapi kebenaran itu relatif. Ga mutlak.
ya tepat sekali, argumen anda senada (secara umum) dengan argumen saya, kebaikan itu bukan hal yang diagung-agungkan seperti halnya ibu miskin itu yang menyumbang 1 koin. saya lebih menghormati orang seperti itu. namun (layer argument), jika ada orang yang bisa menyumbangkan uang 1000000 koin kepada orang miskin itu jauh lebih berguna jika orang tersebut punya hati seperti ibu itu (saya tau itu jarang sekali).
ReplyDeleteThe point is gue muak melihat orang-orang yang terlalu banyak ngomongin tentang kebaikan tapi hasilnya tidak efektif...
after reading it, i could comprehend exactly what you told me this evening...
ReplyDeleteThey need people like me (whom they hate) to remind them. <= I like this.
ReplyDelete"pahala" or whatsoever other name for it is not recognised in Christian.
ReplyDeletethey don't buy their ticket to haven't because they can't afford it! what is the limit of goodness to others? what good is goog enough?
see, human can't afford it, especially if you compare it with your badness or mistakes towards others.
ticket to heaven is a reward or gift from God himself.
that s the messed up part of christianity... Hardwork is not value, it all depends on his "wise" judgment. I dont think any god deserves to pass any judgment to anyone based on the standard he wants us to live in (in the assumption i believe he exists).
ReplyDeleteWhat s the point of living in god's path? praying to him and going to church, if he can selfishly or singlehandedly decides who get into heaven as he pleases. HOW SELFISH AND UNJUST THAT IS!
Process exists to create the end result.
ReplyDeleteINPUT = OUTPUT
Kindness is an overrated feature of the input, but it is not without value. A single sincere smile induce a temporary satisfaction to those that are being helped.
I agree that unkind rich people, when compared to kind poor people, can do more to help those who need it.
But why the unjust comparison? Kind poor people would have done more if only they could. What about kind rich people and unkind rich people?
Kindness is just a small input, but which value is still reflected in the end result.
@ Harjo:
ReplyDeleteyour hard work comes along with your faith to him, so it's also useless or nothing if you say you're Christian but do not do any goodness to this world.
someone should be a judge for what human has done, isn't it?
would you prefer it as imperfect human who judge you? (still in the assumption you believe he exists)
Note: i was a christian, i am not now! that s was when i was a fool, feel insecure about my life.. constant worry for my future... so fragile that i can be fooled that easily by christian persuasion.
ReplyDeleteSecond, doing goodness to the world doesnt have anything to do with being a christian or embracing any religion. Spiritual agnostics can do much more good to this world than religion can... Yes i prefer imperfect human to judge me, but the wise one (guided by logic and reasonableness)... than the almighty unreachable, untouchable, so high, not down to earth, arrogant god... Imperfect human lives my life, my suffering, eat the stuff i eat. They understand and experience things i experience.
to andrew, yes intention is a small fraction of kindness input. it means nothing without result. Result is influenced by intention, but not dependent on intention. There is a sharp difference.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes poor people could have done more if they could. The fact is the cant... so they value of kindness they generate is much smaller than unkind rich people. I said yes intention counts. and i prefer kind rich people to unkind rich people