When philanthropic needs surround us, how can we avoid being overwhelmed?

Seth Godin raises this question in a post where he develops a theme from the secular preference utilitarian ethicist Peter Singer:

Singer is famous for posing a stunningly difficult question, paraphrased as, “If you are walking by a pond and you see a child drowning, do you save her? What if it means ruining a very fancy pair of Italian shoes?” Okay, if we assume the answer is yes, then why not spend the cost of those shoes to save 20 kids who are starving to death across town or the world? There’s really no difference. Or by, extension, invest in research or development that solves a problem forever… The issues are proximity and attention.

My take is that most people would instantly save the kid, but given the choice, probably wouldn’t take the road by the pond again any time soon. We like to avoid these situations, because these situations make us uncomfortable.

Godin develops this last point, summarizing it in three words: We prefer to “avert our eyes.” –When it comes to philanthropic opportunities, most of us prefer to remain ignorant. Why? Because once we become aware of the need, we don’t know when enough is enough.

If you don’t give anything to good causes, then you define enough as zero and you have no worries about achieving ‘enough’. A sad but effective strategy. . . .

What about people who make substantial, anonymous donations to long-term causes? How do they know what’s enough? How do they decide that now it’s okay to go out for a fancy dinner and not send the money to the worthy cause instead? If the solution isn’t clear, if it’s limitless, how do they avoid the temptation of avoiding the problem by doing nothing?

Godin mentions the Mormon church [and some evangelical Christian and other biblically-oriented faith communities] that suggests a 10% tithe “limit” to giving: “This (10%) is ‘enough.’ Give this, and you’re okay.”

Godin says his father used to run the local United Way drive. “He pushed for one percent. ‘One percent isn’t a lot, but it’s enough.’ ”

In the end, he says, it would be good for development officers (what used to be known as “fundraisers”) to think through what “enough” is:

I don’t think good cause marketers need to worry so much about which number or figure they choose, but I think they need to dream hard about whether giving people comfort with a ceiling will bring in a new class of significant donors. Too many people still avert their eyes.

PS this same thinking works for marketers trying to persuade people to join a gym, learn an instrument or go on a diet… if people can’t figure out what ‘enough’ is, where the end lies, they may decide it’s not worth starting. Sad but true.

Here’s what I find intriguing: The people at Generous Giving are urging an inverse view of philanthropic giving. Instead of asking how much is enough in terms of giving, they suggest we ought to be viewing the resources in our hands as rightfully belonging to God (Psalm 50:10, 12–”every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. . . . the world and its fullness are mine”) and we as stewards, fiduciaries, people who have been entrusted by God to use His resources for His purposes.

The question then becomes, not, “How much does God want me to give?” but, rather, “The wealth in my hands is not mine; it is His. God is certainly willing to pay me for my services as trustee of a portion of His estate. But how much is He willing for me to take in remuneration?” Put another way, the question is not, “How much do I need to give?” but, rather, “How much am I permitted to keep?”

It puts the shoe on the other foot.

And for those among us who claim to know God and to listen to His voice, I imagine the question may be more uncomfortable than the one Godin–and, by extension, Singer–is asking.

Either way: “How much is enough?”

Got some answers? How are you seeking to answer these questions?

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

 |  Email This Post  |  Print This Post  |  Subscribe to It!
This entry was posted on Friday, March 26th, 2010 at 3:15 pm and is filed under charity, faith, giving, philanthropy, values. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.