English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The wealthy, affluent, stars are "paying it forward", do you think this is their rationale for not giving in to greed, or is it a genuine desire to make a contribution to those less fortunate ?

2007-01-20 12:20:26 · 20 answers · asked by Pink Freud 1 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

20 answers

I honestly think it's just a fad, but it's helping people all the same.

2007-01-20 12:24:56 · answer #1 · answered by Calliope 2 · 0 0

There are true philanthropists who don't make a big deal out of their contributions to people in a pickle. However, doing good and not talking about it is sometimes more difficult than getting the funds together.

Gates, Branson, Turner, Winfrey are people in the public eye and if they even blink, the press is all over them. Their decisions to part with seeeerious amounts of money is often a public affair alone due to the fact that the money is normally not stacked under their mattress but materialised through liquidation of assets etc. You need people to do that and people like to talk.

However, there's scepticism in order when you hear stories about Sean Penn trying to rescue some sad New Orleans Hurricane Victims but almost drowns them and himself because the boat is overloaded with TV crews (haven't validated this story, so don't kill me if it's not true - I'm just using this as an example).

2007-01-27 13:17:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

When I see Warren Buffet giving $30 billion or so away, I'm prepared to believe it's because he's a modest, humble guy. Bono is another one whose motives seem beyond reproach. When I see Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon showboating, I'm inclined to interpret it as self-indulgent, self-congratulatory, self-righteousness. Some people truly have a love of humanity, while others have a love of depicting themselves as having a love of humanity. It's an individual thing. And some people have mixed motives.
But in an industry that runs on ego, I'm skeptical.

2007-01-28 09:45:43 · answer #3 · answered by G-zilla 4 · 0 0

Altruistic behavior as seen from the outside is just that, altruistic.

However, knowing ahead of time that said behavior will improve reputation and internal emotional state removes the selflessness from the behavior.

If you pick up a hitchhiker and end up feeling good about it after the fact, was it really an altruistic act? You got the bonus of feeling good about an act of kindness right?

On the other hand, does it really matter what the motive is when it comes to good deeds? Is altruism measured from the inside or outside of the actor?

2007-01-20 21:00:15 · answer #4 · answered by Justin 5 · 0 0

I think the act of paying it forward could be more credible if it's done for the sake of it, without the media glare, without letting others what you did. Sometimes, when people help others and their PR guys make it a point to announce to the world what their principals did, it more or less, loses the sincerity that goes in hand-in-hand with kindness.

2007-01-28 04:00:00 · answer #5 · answered by cheche 2 · 0 0

I think that if you do something because you been there or because you recognize that you can make a difference but not just trying but by also giving is not feeding your ego the problem is when you give to be notice or to gain something in return then the purpose of giving no longer will be call giving but instead should be call exchanging because giving is when you give and not expect to received something in return but instead you give and instead of saying I gyved you will say thank you God for the opportunity of making the difference

2007-01-28 14:55:44 · answer #6 · answered by pacifico_80 1 · 0 0

I believe that some of them genuinely do it because they want to help and have the money to do so, but I do believe there are some who "pay it forward" for ego purposes, publicity purposes and even tax deduction purposes. I feel like God will judge those who give with evil intentions and those who genuinely give from their hearts.

2007-01-20 20:29:55 · answer #7 · answered by ladystarrchild107 3 · 0 0

I think for some it is a publicity stunt, but others they honestly want to help people less fortunate. You have to remember that they are people too who have ulterior motives and lack them, just as the rest of us do.

2007-01-20 20:48:13 · answer #8 · answered by Xenia 3 · 0 0

Either way the dollars are getting to the less-fortunate.

Whether they are self-serving or sincere takes a back seat as a result.

2007-01-25 14:16:13 · answer #9 · answered by SANCHA 5 · 0 0

I think it is the former. They get even more fame by giving away some of the money. They already have so much that it's not really a sacrifice.

2007-01-20 20:42:04 · answer #10 · answered by trueblue88 5 · 0 0

for some its their hope that it will diminish their egotistical personalities; those that do it because its the trend or for publicity.

the genuine desire in doing a kindness is to do it over and over and over and over without giving it a second thought.

2007-01-28 19:55:56 · answer #11 · answered by loving 40+ 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers