Starving people in Africa

[AdHoc]

Is it a logical fallacy to show pictures of starving children in Africa?

Yes, if you are using it to argue that one ought to help starving children in Africa.

I personally agree with the answer given to the question above. Showing pictures tugs on a person's heartstrings but if the logic that drives the argument is examined its likely logically flawed.

But it makes me wonder, is there a logical argument that could be put forward that people in the west should help people in Africa?

My heart tells me we should but I have no idea if there is a logical reason for it.

[Artie]

But it makes me wonder, is there a logical argument that could be put forward that people in the west should help people in Africa?

My heart tells me we should but I have no idea if there is a logical reason for it.

The Golden Rule.

[AdHoc]

But it makes me wonder, is there a logical argument that could be put forward that people in the west should help people in Africa?

My heart tells me we should but I have no idea if there is a logical reason for it.

The Golden Rule.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Is this what you are referring to as the golden rule?

If so are you saying that if I donate to charities in Africa that some day one of those children might help me? What is the probability of that event occuring? Or do you believe that God will reward me?

If I'm purely going to look at this question logically I would want to know what my ROI will be.

[Artie]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Is this what you are referring to as the golden rule?

Yes.

If so are you saying that if I donate to charities in Africa that some day one of those children might help me? What is the probability of that event occuring? Or do you believe that God will reward me?

There are so many variables for a positive outcome of such an action for others and yourself in such a situation that it's impossible to try to list them all. One might say that the Golden Rule is an attempt at expressing the best course of action in any given situation. There's no reason to involve deities.

[AdHoc]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Is this what you are referring to as the golden rule?

Yes.

If so are you saying that if I donate to charities in Africa that some day one of those children might help me? What is the probability of that event occuring? Or do you believe that God will reward me?

There are so many variables for a positive outcome of such an action for others and yourself in such a situation that it's impossible to try to list them all. One might say that the Golden Rule is an attempt at expressing the best course of action in any given situation. There's no reason to involve deities.

Even if the reasons are myriad as you suggest, unless you actually state any of them I will remain unconvinced.

[Artie]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Is this what you are referring to as the golden rule?

Yes.

If so are you saying that if I donate to charities in Africa that some day one of those children might help me? What is the probability of that event occuring? Or do you believe that God will reward me?

There are so many variables for a positive outcome of such an action for others and yourself in such a situation that it's impossible to try to list them all. One might say that the Golden Rule is an attempt at expressing the best course of action in any given situation. There's no reason to involve deities.

Even if the reasons are myriad as you suggest, unless you actually state any of them I will remain unconvinced.

The point is that religion evolved because some people couldn't use logic, reason and common sense and arrive at things like the Golden Rule themselves. They didn't have compassion or altruism or empathy or conscience or any of the qualities and morals others got from evolution. The evolution of morals was to ensure that as many as possible survived. But some people had to be told by religious authority figures how to behave morally baiting with eternal survival. They simply couldn't figure it out by themselves. If you can't reason yourself into behaving morally, I don't think any rational argument can convince you.

As to why donate to charities in Africa or any other country far from ones own? Because of course

1. You would improve the living conditions of the children and give you a good conscience. (If you have one.)
2. You would take some of the burden away from their families and give the family better living conditions.
3. Giving to charities contributes to stabilizing the situation in the area.
4. People will realize that you care about somebody else but yourself and will look at you positively and help you if you are in need.
5. If you give to charities there, the government in those countries might look favorably on for example trade negotiations with your country and good relations between countries benefits you personally too.
6. If people generally help each other cross borders the world might become a better and more stable place in general and this also benefits you of course.

[AdHoc]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Is this what you are referring to as the golden rule?

Yes.

If so are you saying that if I donate to charities in Africa that some day one of those children might help me? What is the probability of that event occuring? Or do you believe that God will reward me?

There are so many variables for a positive outcome of such an action for others and yourself in such a situation that it's impossible to try to list them all. One might say that the Golden Rule is an attempt at expressing the best course of action in any given situation. There's no reason to involve deities.

Even if the reasons are myriad as you suggest, unless you actually state any of them I will remain unconvinced.

The point is that religion evolved because some people couldn't use logic, reason and common sense and arrive at things like the Golden Rule themselves. They didn't have compassion or altruism or empathy or conscience or any of the qualities and morals others got from evolution. The evolution of morals was to ensure that as many as possible survived. But some people had to be told by religious authority figures how to behave morally baiting with eternal survival. They simply couldn't figure it out by themselves. If you can't reason yourself into behaving morally, I don't think any rational argument can convince you.

Religion evolved? Morals evolved? I think you might be begging the question with this paragraph.

As to why donate to charities in Africa or any other country far from ones own? Because of course

1. You would improve the living conditions of the children and give you a good conscience. (If you have one.)

Conscience? Like I will get a warm fuzzy feeling? This is not logical.

2. You would take some of the burden away from their families and give the family better living conditions.
3. Giving to charities contributes to stabilizing the situation in the area.

These don't really address the question of why should we logically care? These seem like matters of the heart.

4. People will realize that you care about somebody else but yourself and will look at you positively and help you if you are in need.
5. If you give to charities there, the government in those countries might look favorably on for example trade negotiations with your country and good relations between countries benefits you personally too.
6. If people generally help each other cross borders the world might become a better and more stable place in general and this also benefits you of course.

These last few do present some logic for helping others but I'm not sure that they would be enough to spur me on to do good deeds for people in a faraway country on their own. I think it would make more sense to invest that money and be able to help myself from my own resources if and when the time comes that I need it.

[Artie]

Religion evolved? Morals evolved? I think you might be begging the question with this paragraph.

No, using logic, reason and common sense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutiona ... _religions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_morality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism_in_animals
Start with these links and take it from there.

1. You would improve the living conditions of the children and give you a good conscience. (If you have one.)

Conscience? Like I will get a warm fuzzy feeling? This is not logical.

Conscience is simply a mechanism that makes you feel good if you follow the morals evolved by evolution. A good conscience is just feedback that you are doing the right thing. It is quite logical that evolution should provide you with such a feedback mechanism. Some people don't have it though.

4. People will realize that you care about somebody else but yourself and will look at you positively and help you if you are in need.
5. If you give to charities there, the government in those countries might look favorably on for example trade negotiations with your country and good relations between countries benefits you personally too.
6. If people generally help each other cross borders the world might become a better and more stable place in general and this also benefits you of course.

These last few do present some logic for helping others but I'm not sure that they would be enough to spur me on to do good deeds for people in a faraway country on their own. I think it would make more sense to invest that money and be able to help myself from my own resources if and when the time comes that I need it.

The Golden Rule doesn't have any limits on geographical distance and it doesn't matter where the people who need help the most are geographically located. We're all on the same little planet.

[Bust Nak]

But it makes me wonder, is there a logical argument that could be put forward that people in the west should help people in Africa?

I don't think so there is a logical argument to help people you have low chance of ever meeting. Treating it as some sort of investment of goodness and expecting any return, is far too indirect, involve too many outside factors, to be supported logically.

My heart tells me we should but I have no idea if there is a logical reason for it.

Ultimately, you feel good about yourself when you help, is all the reason you need.

[bluethread]

My heart tells me we should but I have no idea if there is a logical reason for it.

Ultimately, you feel good about yourself when you help, is all the reason you need.

What if one does not feel good about themselves when they do this? What if one feels better getting a big screen TV or helping out the kids in the neighborhood? What if one enjpys wtching movies of starving childfren?