What is more instinctual: helping or avoidance?

[Faithless]

The only reason that I ask is this:

The world has a freaking amount of suffering all over -- much of it at the hands of oppression, but also due to other factors.

But it seems that tend to avoid much of this suffering, if not look away. Oh, we help where we can, but it seems our tendancy seems to be avoidance. Numbing if you will.

If I am right, is that avoidance (or numbing affect) something that is instinctual? If helping is instinctual, itself, is avoidance a higher instinct?

[applehead]

i think physical distance plays
a factor.

[Tao]

i think it depends on the mood of the person......for me it depends on how tired I am.

[ism]

I'm not sure if I'm reading your question correctly. Is helping or avoidance more instinctual in the face of macroscopic suffering? I mean, helping a little old lady across the street is a lot different from freeing political dissidents and stopping world hunger. It's hard not to feel insignificant, and perhaps as an aggregate group, something can be accomplished, and that's what organizations are for, but there are so many causes to spread resources among. There's also the tendency to want to fix problems "at home" first.

I suppose it's instinctual to balance self-preservation with preservation of the species, but given the challenges of helping people a world away, it's more a question of practicality.

[Emperor_Mike]

Largely depends on the person. I go out of my way to help people all the time and only avoid situations if there are major issues present that are beyond my control. Even then I usually do what I can anyway. What I don't do is turn a blind eye to those in need and none of us (in my opinion) ought to do so either. It's terrible see how indifferent people are to the homeless, the starving, the elder, the sick and the dying. If any of you want a lesson in how to listen to other people and how to physically and emotionally care for others you ought to volunteer at a hospice. It is the most emotionally wrenching and the same time the most rewarding experience you can have. After spending some time speaking and comforting the terminally ill and assuring them that everything will be "OK" you really can't help but obtain a new, more positive look on life (not to mention gratitude for everyone and everything you have.)

[angel nympho]

I think MANY people would want to help. But the fact that we do not see this suffering first hand in our daily lives (it's not all up in our faces) we don't generally have helping people we don't see or know about very high on our lists. I think many people, if they were faced with someone who's clearly suffering, one on one (being in a crowd seems to make passing them by much much easier), people would at least sorta want to reach out to them. but maybe i'm just an optimist.

[Emperor_Mike]

I think MANY people would want to help. But the fact that we do not see this suffering first hand in our daily lives (it's not all up in our faces) we don't generally have helping people we don't see or know about very high on our lists. I think many people, if they were faced with someone who's clearly suffering, one on one (being in a crowd seems to make passing them by much much easier), people would at least sorta want to reach out to them. but maybe i'm just an optimist.


You would also have to figure out what "helping" out means. Aid can come in the form of time or resources. In addition, you don't necessarily have to see a person or a group of people in need of help to possess the inclination to alleviate suffering. The willingness to do so comes from within, I think. You can give a few hours to physically help out or you can open the pocket book when being there in person is impossible or not viable (e.g. Cancer Research.)

As for being part of a crowd and passing the needy by, it shouldn't be like this. Help is help regardless of fact that you have friends or family by your side. In fact, your generous actions may make them feel guilty enough to put in some time or coin of their own. :)

[Faithless]

I'm not sure if I'm reading your question correctly. Is helping or avoidance more instinctual in the face of macroscopic suffering? I mean, helping a little old lady across the street is a lot different from freeing political dissidents and stopping world hunger. It's hard not to feel insignificant, and perhaps as an aggregate group, something can be accomplished, and that's what organizations are for, but there are so many causes to spread resources among. There's also the tendency to want to fix problems "at home" first.

I suppose it's instinctual to balance self-preservation with preservation of the species, but given the challenges of helping people a world away, it's more a question of practicality.

I'm talking about all the different sufferings, I guess. We have so much, and sometimes there seems that there is not enough of a commitment to relieve or fix them. Or is there?

I'm thinking of all the people who couldn't give a shit about the homeless, poverty, different ailments, oppression, etc.

Yeah, there's a lot, and sometimes it seems overwhelming, but not everyone is involved in something. Should I read that as avoidance? Are the majority or the vast majority of people avoiders? Or are there more helpers?

And is this really environmental or instinctual? Maybe it's all really nature/nurture, and there is really a mix.

[Faithless]

It's terrible see how indifferent people are to the homeless, the starving, the elder, the sick and the dying.

This indifference is like my idea of avoidance. We can see a guy lying there in the door way, run down looking, probably scraping day-to-day for something to eat out of a garbage can. We can understand that "this winter" will be particularly cold and some of the homeless may die, but we don't all jump up to help them -- even we realize they could die out there.

I'm aware of this. But probably don't give enough for this, save for the occasional warm coat donation.

So, what is it inside of us, or some of us (we know that there are people who dedicate there lives to this), that we would be content to look the other way without much guilt?

[Faithless]

I think MANY people would want to help. But the fact that we do not see this suffering first hand in our daily lives (it's not all up in our faces) we don't generally have helping people we don't see or know about very high on our lists. I think many people, if they were faced with someone who's clearly suffering, one on one (being in a crowd seems to make passing them by much much easier), people would at least sorta want to reach out to them. but maybe i'm just an optimist.

Maybe. Remember Apartheid? Remember the regular reports of people being gunned down?

Why did it take so long for it to end? Why didn't we protest the situation as strongly as the oppressed at the front lines?

Out of sight, out of mind? Is that a biological function?

[applehead]

i guess a lot of people feel that
one person won't make a difference
in a lot of situations, like helping out to
eliminate world hunger or... whatever.


but with me, i just feel like there's a limit.
i've tried helping that homeless man but once
you start, there's no end.
you feel like you should do more and
help out more people.
which, isn't a bad thing.
but it really takes a mental and emotional
toll on you. well, for me.
you keep going out of your way
and it also takes a toll on your personal life,
making you feel more and more helpless.
which is why, a lot of times, i feel like
i should turn my back...


does anyone feel like this?

[Emperor_Mike]

This indifference is like my idea of avoidance. We can see a guy lying there in the door way, run down looking, probably scraping day-to-day for something to eat out of a garbage can. We can understand that "this winter" will be particularly cold and some of the homeless may die, but we don't all jump up to help them -- even we realize they could die out there.

I'm aware of this. But probably don't give enough for this, save for the occasional warm coat donation.

So, what is it inside of us, or some of us (we know that there are people who dedicate there lives to this), that we would be content to look the other way without much guilt?

Well, at least you're doing something. Some people are so self-absorbed that they fail to see suffering right in front of them.

I would imagine that indifference to these situations stems from an individual's perceptions of priorities in his or life. Since a vast portion of our time is devoted to doing things that benefit ourselves, it wouldn't be at all surprising to learn that avoidance has much to do selfishness. That's my take, in any case.

[Emperor_Mike]

i guess a lot of people feel that
one person won't make a difference
in a lot of situations, like helping out to
eliminate world hunger or... whatever.


but with me, i just feel like there's a limit.
i've tried helping that homeless man but once
you start, there's no end.
you feel like you should do more and
help out more people.
which, isn't a bad thing.
but it really takes a mental and emotional
toll on you. well, for me.
you keep going out of your way
and it also takes a toll on your personal life,
making you feel more and more helpless.
which is why, a lot of times, i feel like
i should turn my back...


does anyone feel like this?

It really does take a toll on your personal life. I can't remember how many evenings out with friends, birthday parties and other engagements I've had to put off on the account that this organisation had to do a fundraiser or that organisation needed to do some sort of food/clothing drive. Many a time I've wanted to drop everything and just walk away, but it's not that easy. People are in need of help and if everyone turned a blind eye to their silent (and not so silent) pleas, tragedy would befall them; death in the most extreme cases, but starvation and loneliness are just as bad. No one deserves to live in the meanest manner imaginable. So we must do our part to help the hungry, hurting, and weary. It may not seem rewarding at times, but it's always nice to know that your efforts have made or are making an individual's life just a bit more tolerable.

Life is like a bank account, I suppose. You can have a whole heap of good things happen to you (withdrawals) but if you don't sincerely give something back to society (deposits) in the form of time and effort to worthwhile causes, you'll eventually have nothing to draw on.

[Faithless]

Well, at least you're doing something. Some people are so self-absorbed that they fail to see suffering right in front of them.

I would imagine that indifference to these situations stems from an individual's perceptions of priorities in his or life. Since a vast portion of our time is devoted to doing things that benefit ourselves, it wouldn't be at all surprising to learn that avoidance has much to do selfishness. That's my take, in any case.

I can understand one's priorities, if they are scraping to make ends meet.

But their are folks whose priorities are making doe and spending it all on the weekend -- without even so much as a quick glance to the guy propped-up against the side of the building. (No comment as to whether this is wrong or right. Just an observation.)

[Faithless]

you feel like you should do more and
help out more people.
which, isn't a bad thing.
but it really takes a mental and emotional
toll on you. well, for me....

Which would validate my avoidance (or mind numbing) theory.

[Faithless]

Ahhhh! This is getting boring. Lock it, mod.