Topics Ethics

Question I am thirteen years old and I do not understand the world. In terms of world hunger, how can one possibly find happiness in their lives when such tragedies exist? Approximately 24,000 thousand people starved to death today, and three billion people live with under two dollars every day. For one to continue their lives as normal, or even not give any care, would this be the equivalence of starving someone yourself since you have the power to make a difference, yet you are choosing not to? And is the root cause of poverty a lack of equality within the world, or are specific governments not running thing effectively? For people that are not actively practicing compassion, would that make you a horrible person for not wanting to aleviate the extent of pain and suffering that so many have to endure day after day?

Accepted:
November 26, 2010

Comments

We live in a world that contains much tragedy and it is difficult to determine the scope of an individual's responsibility for these events, especially in the case of preventable deaths (death due to starvation when there is surplus agriculture). I suggest that the cause and cure for such tragic loss involves both indivudual and collective action. Often war, greed and corruption are at the roots of poverty, which can be accentuated due to drought, flooding, and other natural dissasters, especially when relief is in short supply. According to some philosophers, not to go to the aid of someone whom you could save (from starvation, for example) would be the moral equivalent of killing them. For a very throrough case that current world poverty calls for radical action (lest we turn out to be moral monsters) you might look at Peter Unger's Living High, And Letting Die. But probably most philosophers think there is a moral difference between an act (killing) and an omission (letting die) in many circumstances. Baruch Brody, for example, has argued persuasively (in my view) that the prohibition against killing is more stringent that the prohibition against allowing someone to die.

You and I have several choices: among these, we could engage in radical self-giving to the maximum (to the point where any more giving would make us victims), professional or vocational offering (dedicating one's life to promoting awareness, charity or becoming an aid worker, a doctor without borders, etc) or proportional giving. The latter might take the following shape: in addition to promoting aid politically (using votes and petitions to prompt one's political community / nation to act collectively to relieve hunger), one might arrive at a notion of contributing what may be one's fair share. Let's say you live in a community that gives collectively but not enough to fully address famine. What would be the additional amount needed to sponsor the required aid relief and, if everyone (or almost everyone) were to individually raise that money, how much would that be? I don't pretend that this method will fully allow one to be happy in the midst of loss, but perhaps contributing what may be a fair amount would provide real help and not involve profound compromise (in other words, you can still be a musician and need not change careers and become an aid worker). Nonetheless, if this more modest strategy seems weak there is always radical self-giving and professional or vocational self-donation.

A very good question - how can we happy in this world of seemingly boundless suffering? Of course, we could always get into the "it all depends what you mean by happiness" semantics game but lets not go there. Whatever the good life is, it will have to include a connection with other humans and a real feeling for their suffering. Maybe part of the good life would involve letting that suffering into your heart and making you a more compassionate person. Sinking into depression or despair over it would be rather narcisstic.

A few random points, I think it is important of recognize that there are psychological as well as physical limitations in life-- on our capacity to care. It might also be important to remember to address the pain of the people sitting right next to you. In every class that I teach I find that about 20 percent of students are going through some very very hard stuff- parents dieing that kind of thing. So don't forget the person next to you in the face of world hunger. Finally, don't forget that we will all be getting in the suffering boat at some point - not the starvation but other travails.

Thanks for your very earnest question. I hope that you- that we can all find a way, to feel and act on the suffering of others and at the same time, find joy in life.