Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
chapter 10 behavior in social context
human social behavior essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: chapter 10 behavior in social context
As social beings, humans desire interaction with others in order to attain a gratifying existence. When people are in unfortunate situations, other people come to their side. These acts are commonly known as charity. As the voluntary giving of help to those in need, charity has become the means of wealthy philanthropists to showcase their affluence and prowess. However, giving at its most basic level is attainable by any individual willing to make the sacrifice. Giving is a symbiotic relationship that not only helps those in need but also those that give. Those who give their time, talent, and/or treasure feel a sense of worth and achievement when seeing how their charity can make an impact. However, simply giving food or money does not solve the problems of impoverishment that are deeply rooted in injustice …show more content…
While the emotional appeal of young starving children is attracting, one must ensure their money is being used for the most good. More importantly, an organization should have a goal to eradicate poverty all together. Although giving food supplies and clothing is a worthy deed, those stricken by poverty are in need of an enduring solution. An objective approach to helping those in impoverishment countries is based around achieving basic rights. Oxfam International works hands on in communities throughout the world to give women a voice and to secure the privileges that all humans are afforded. Their influence in Paraguay is a prime example of the charity fighting for lasting solutions. Over the last ten years, 585,000 young citizens in Curuguaty, Paraguay have been displaced from their land by large companies and wealthy individuals. Oxfam has “launched a campaign to support the young people and farming families of Curuguaty who have lost their lands to claim their right to a place where they can cultivate their own food and build a future for themselves” (Oxfam
People are starving all over the world. They lack food, water, and basic medication. Some suggest that the wealthy should donate and do their part to help. Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics, wrote an article called “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” in The New York Times Magazine, in which he suggests that the prosperous people should donate all money not needed for the basic requirements of life.
In Peter Singer’s Famine, Affluence, and Morality, he critiques the way in which modern societies have grown accustomed to their ordinary thoughts about famine, affluence, and morality in general. Singer describes a situation in which nine million refugees from East Bengal are living in poverty, and it is the responsibility of the wealthy, and better-off nations to take immediate and long term action to provide for them and to end poverty overall. (Singer, 873) Through his essay, Singer envisions a new world where giving to those in need is no longer seen as charity, but rather a moral duty. He states that in the world we currently live in, it is seen as generous and partaking in a good deed when you donate money to charity, and no one is blamed for not (876). Singer proposes that excess money should be given to those in need, rather than spending it in “selfish and unnecessary” ways (876).
Most people feel that they should help the needy in some way or another. The problem is how to help them. This problem generally arises when there is a person sitting on the side of the road in battered clothes with a cardboard sign asking for some form of help, almost always in the form of money. Yet something makes the giver uneasy. What will they do with this money? Do they need this money? Will it really help them? The truth of the matter is, it won't. However, there are things that can be done to help the needy. Giving money to a reliable foundation will help the helpless, something that transferring money from a pocket to a man's tin can will never do.
Greatergood.org is a charity that revolves on social justice issues around the world. They help with various programs to make sure that people, pets, and the planet get the respect they deserve. They work to help address the causes of world hunger and food insecurity. They help women receive early detection and treatment of breast cancer and other health concerns. Greatergood.org also helps prevent and treat childhood illnesses and other health concerns. Education is an important essential, so they promote children’s literacy and education. They also provide care and feed animals in shelters and address the causes of their conditions. We have only one Earth and Greatergood.org helps protect and restore the environment.
The organisation that I have chosen to research is Caritas Australia. It is a non-profit international aid and development agency of the Catholic Church in Australia. Their motto is to help “end poverty, promote justice and uphold dignity” for the poor so they won’t need to rely on charities anymore. Furthermore, the international symbol of Caritas is a flaming cross which represents Christ’s burning love for his people.
In “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” Singer argues that all households should donate a percentage of their incomes to charity. Majority of the American population is satisfied with donating little to nothing to those in need, but seldom rethink the purchase of the luxury items. It is a commonly accepted fact that those who work for their earnings are deserving of the monies that they receive. Unfortunately, those in third world countries that don’t have the same resources and opportunities are unable to sustain their livelihood. Some children in third world countries suffer from deprivation of food and shelter; while those that are fortunate enough to have jobs are paid only cents a day. (“Some H-1B Workers Underpaid, Federal Auditors Say.”) Therefore, Singer is right in saying that we should be more cognizant to the suffering that takes place globally, but in order for his vision to be recognized Americans must be made aware of the benefits that their dollars can have; as well as the downfalls that occur when they don’t donate.
When people are in need you want to help them but you don’t know how. If you see a homeless person asking for money and food, buy the something to eat and when you give the the food give them some money while you're at it.
Oxfam’s purpose is to help create the lasting solutions to the injustice of poverty. Oxfam is a part of a global movement for change, empowering people to
When deciding on which non-profit organization to give resources to, a person must think of a number of questions that need to be answered in which to choose a certain one. The most pertinent of these questions is the one that asks which cause the person cares about the most. The problem, for a majority of the population, is that they just do not know what they truly care about. That is why the United Way is the best option for donations. The United way does not focus on one specific, but instead works for a variety of different causes focused on fixing some of the different problems inside of the United States. The United Way is an organization, which envisions a world where all individuals and families achieve their human potential through education, income stability and healthy lives. It plans to do this by improving lives by mobilizing the caring power of communities around the world to advance the common good. The United Way needs money and time in order to achieve some of these goals. This essay will explain why the United Way is the best organization to give ones resources to.
If we donated maximally to everyone suffering in poverty-stricken countries our economic foundation would be destroyed. Our economy is driven by the consumption of buyers. However, if the income of individuals is affected by the standards of charity outlined by Peter Singer, consumers would not be able to uphold their role in supporting economic growth through the purchase of normal and luxury goods. As a result of this, the economy would collapse and individuals would lose their jobs. If the job market declined, no one would be able to fulfill Singer’s ideology of preventing suffering. In fact, we wouldn’t be able to complete the normal societal standards of charity. In addition, our income would not be able to support the continuation of giving due to our creation of overpopulation in other countries. Giving maximumly would prevent priorly inevitable deaths of individuals around the world. Be that as it may, even though this is monumental, when there is greater longevity, the population of a country grows dramatically and a bigger population leads to more impoverished humans. Moreover, economic dependency is also created when an affluent country supports an indigent country. The economy of a poverty- stricken country such as Bengal, in the example given by Singer, will become dependent on donations to prevent famine. If expectations of donations are not met, the individuals and economy of such country
Peter singer argues that it shouldn’t be any reason for Americans to don’t donate money to poor children when they can afford luxuries that are not important for their lives and health. Singer used two examples with two different situations and he tying to motivate readers to donate as much as money they can.
Conversely, in the case of preventing the death of a child in a third world country by donating to a charity, you are more likely prolonging a life for a short period of time rather than truly saving it. Donating money that will be put towards, for example, a malaria net, may prevent someone from passing away due to one illness but it will not give them an education and it will not save them from famine or distress. The donation will only save people in great poverty from one of their many struggles. In the biography “Mountains Beyond Mountains,” Tracy Kidder discusses Paul Farmer’s establishment of the nonprofit, Partners in Health, that obtains donations to its charitable cause from large companies and organizations. These companies and organizations are well-established foundations that can give an amount of money great enough to potentially make a difference and save lives through health care. Nonetheless, even with these great amounts of money, one of Farmer’s patients, John, gets all the medical help possible yet dies anyway. This saddening story exemplifies the point that when donating you cannot guarantee that a life will be saved. The best medical care possible could not save John, so even the best help we can give through charity may not save the people in need. There are many struggles in third-world countries
‘We all should help ourselves first’ might be the best way to describe how we could survive in this world but if we could afford our wants and needs, it would be a sublime act of us to help others. The helps could be happened just by making a trade-off of how much we could spend our money unnecessarily and instead donating that specific amount of money to the charity, which could help save lives of others, is noble act of human notwithstanding to how much is donated or what forms of donations are executed. In some cases, the little money of us could buy some families in Asia a meal that they crave for, pay tuition fee for their children or even afford to purchase prescription medication for their health. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that greed spirit exists in everyone on the entire planet, people always look for returning prizes, regardless of the size of prize, after doing good deeds for others. The prize, however, could be depicted in wide range of pictures; for instance respect from the society, favorable votes or it could just be happiness, which is created for ourselves by knowing that lives a...
Individualism is rampant in our world. More and more people are concerned with what they want, when they want it and how they want it. They put blinders on and go about their work, convinced that “looking out for number one” is the only way to succeed and find happiness. If everyone were to adopt this way of thinking and living, the world would become violently competitive, gloomy, and callous. However, if we open our lives and give service to those less fortunate than ourselves, we allow our hearts to receive immeasurable happiness. There are countless members of society, who make service and ultimately self-sacrifice a part of their everyday lives. One of the greatest examples the world has of a self-sacrificing person is Mother Teresa. She said, “In this life we cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love… It is not the magnitude of our actions but the amount of love that is put into them that matters.” Doctors Without Borders is a powerful humanitarian organization that was most recently volunteering in Haiti. Part of their mission statement reads, “…We unite direct medical care with a commitment to bearing witness and speaking out against the underlying causes of suffering. Our aid workers and staff protest violations of humanitarian law on behalf of populations who have no voice, and bring the concerns of their patients to public forums…” These are just two mainstream examples of people and organizations that live and work for others, to improve the quality of their lives.
“Charity sees the need, not the cause.” (German Proverb) Many people may question “What is charity?” According to Webster’s dictionary, Charity is defined as the benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity. Charity to me is significant because it gives you a feeling of inner satisfaction while helping out your community as well. If you have the capability, then you should be able to share it with those less fortunate. The community we live in has a huge influence on us personally – it fosters safety, responsibility and sustainability – so it is important that we take our community seriously for the greater good of humanity and for our own personal benefit.