Donations


When it comes to acts of charity or compassion, most people will give to that one individual in need rather than a huge number in distress. So produce a picture or details of one particular person who needs help, and you are more likely to get aid, help, whatever. Ask for money for thousands of faceless, nameless victims of an a genocide somewhere remote and you'll get little or nothing (most of the time).

Agencies like CRY know this phenomenon which is why many of their schemes try to associate your contribution with one particular child, to give you status reports, to maintain that connection. It's for a good cause, so I guess we shouldn't mind being played this way.

It also turns out that the more analytical mood that you are in when asked to donate, the less likely you are to give. Which makes sense when you think of it: giving without any expectation of returns is an emotional act, not a rational one. So I guess that a planet like earth will have more donations than a planet like Vulcan full of Mr.Spock's!

Comments

  1. I agree that donations are not done to please the intellect - they serve our emotion. While in ordinary situations, donors may connect better to specific recipients with a name and a face,during calamities of large scale, sympathy takes over and people reach out; individual orientation fortunately goes to be background.

    Don't know how many see it this way, but I believe in this: When you reach out with donations (or help of any kind) to the needy people, what it does to you goes past emotion level - certainly a gradual change is sure to happen that way. You are moving towards empathy, even if the setting at the start level is sympathy.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Student of the Year

Animal Senses #7: Touch and Remote Touch

The Retort of the "Luxury Person"