Greetings Dopers,
I have been reading these forums for a bit now, and have decided to post a question that often troubles me. That is, what do I owe my fellow man? I mean fellow man (well, person) to be construed as widely as possible - everyone that is part of the human race. What should I personally do to improve their situations? As I understand it, there can be two extremes in response:
Nothing. I imagine a philosophy like Objectivism would support this idea, that man’s rational self interest is his highest ideal. All I need to do is seek my own fulfillment; others can seek their own.
Everything. Jesus and the rich man who has to give away all of his possessions to the poor comes to mind as an example. The idea that one should live in service to others, to better others lives, and that this is the highest ideal a person can strive for.
I am not trying to argue for either one of these extremes, but they are the responses that come to mind. I feel that the answer probably lies somewhere between these two. I realize that there may not be a single answer, that there is probably not a true answer: we all make our own decisions. But I am interested in what Dopers believe in. I encourage you to draw upon philosophy, religion, ethics - whatever fields of knowledge help inform your answer to this question. I appreciate your responses in advance,
- NoALittleH
Nothing assuming you take nothing from him. Which means only eating food which you have gathered, processed, and cooked yourself. Only living in dwellings which you have built for yourself, on land which you claim and defend as your own. And not using any tools or instruments in these endeavors which you have not crafted yourself. And you can not avail yourself of the services of other men. So for example: driving a car and getting manicure/pedicures is right out.
Chances are, you’re not doing the above. If you’re living in society, you are benefitting from the labor of others. You have to put in what you are taking out if any sort of equilibrium is to be maintained.
Humans, like other animals, are “pre-wired” for some degree of social behavior. What you are asking is how do we get from that “is” to an “ought”. We can’t - except arbitrarily.
I must first correct some statements. Jesus would have said we owe everything to God first, then to other men and ourselves. In fact, he actually did say so. And Jesus would not really have been talking about raw duties and debts, either. But this is getting pretty deeply into theology and philosophy.
I submit your question cannot be answered as it exists yet. Let us start here: what do you think you owe other men. Why do you think this?
Thats what I was trying to get at with statement in my original post that there probably is not one answer or a true answer. What I am wondering is how you arrive at your arbitrary answer.
Thanks for the correction smiling bandit. Would you agree that my original point still stands? That a life of service to others (perhaps God first) is the highest ideal?
Okay, that was flippant. Sorry. But to dig any deeper is going to lead into another free will debate. That’s been done to the nth degree here without much to show for it. For me, there’s no such thing as free will. So my answer is determined by whatever nature/nurture I’ve experienced including whatever reason my nature/nurture has provided. Net result? I’m probably a lot like most everyone you meet.
Your first paragraph has nothing to do with the OP. AFAIK, no philosophy (except nihilism) expects people to be totally self-sufficient, and never give to or take from other people, not even engaging in equal-value trade. Nobody expects everyone to re-invent the wheel.
But in your second paragraph, you got it right. If we trade things of equal value, then you don’t really “owe” anybody a damn thing, except debts that haven’t yet been paid.
At the very least, you owe it to your fellow man not to take anything from him or make his life worse. If the rest of us are worse off than we would have been if you had never existed, you haven’t “paid your debt.”
Beyond that, it’s hard to say. If you think of all the people who have, directly or indirectly, done things for you, from parents and other people who took care of you as a child, to all the people throughout history who worked or fought or sacrificed to make the society we live in today as good as it is, what you owe is immeasurable. (Although some would argue that all those people did what they did for reasons of their own, and if they didn’t find what they did rewarding in some way they wouldn’t have done it.)
And that’s not even touching the religious aspect of the question, although as smiling bandit pointed out, that involves what we owe to God. (One answer: everything, more than we could ever possibly repay; but that’s okay, God accepts us anyway.)
Everything that you can reasonably spare. As others said- we are social animals, and are dependent on one another for everything from affection and personal care to goods and resources. Ideally one takes what one gives.
But I took note of your suggestion of a life of service to others as a supreme goal. While there are great examples of selfless individuals who spend life in servitude, it isn’t realistic to expect every individual to sacrifice all personal wants and needs in order to serve his fellow man. And that is such a high place to set the bar- who among us doesn’t feel overwhelmed by images of starving and diseased children or an entire town destroyed by a tornado? When faced with such a monstrous tasks, it is easy for most of us to shake our heads and look away.
But can you do more to extend kindness to your neighbors and improve social relationships? Easily. What is owed to your fellow man encompasses far more than single handedly rescuing and supporting a third world country or a life dedicated to servitude. You can give a kind word, use common courtesies like please and thank you, perform chores that others lack the skill or good health to complete, and if you have any extra- money.
Not everyone deserving of courtesy, attention, or aid is chronically ill, desperately hungry or impoverished. Service to your fellow man can be accomplished with simple generosity of time and spirit. Respect, good intentions and forethought go a long way. It isn’t necessary to withhold kindness and aid to your fellow man until or unless one has the intention of a life of servitude.
Christianity teaches us that we are our brothers keepers, but doesn’t really say why. When Jesus’ disciples were fighting among themselves as to who was the greatest, Jesus said that the greatest among you is the one that serves the rest. He also said to give to him that asketh and to not turn him away. The life of a Christian is a life of service to others.
Now the why of this is simple: in order to receive you must give. If you wish happiness then make someone else happy. I read a business book that said if you want to make a lot of money, find someone who wants to make a lot of money and help him do it.
This does not mean you sacrifice yourself for others.
NoALittleH or anyone else,
What, if anything, does a bonobo owe her fellow bonobo? Or a dog to a fellow dog? Or a bee to his fellow drone or to his queen? (Keep in mind the is-ought problem.) We may be quite impressed with our own frontal lobes, but do they really change the question? Only if you think they have a supernatural quality or origin.
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. We have no gotten nearly as far as an actual point yet. At the moment, we have a question. Let us begin with "What DO you (NoALittleH) believe you owe your fellow man, right now. Nothing? Anything?Everything? Why do you beleve this?
Once we determine where we currently stand, we will be much more able to proceed to something else. And until we do forgure out where we stand currently, we won’t have any idea how we might see about getting somewhere else.
I noticed that people saying not to hurt others don’t really justify that. That may well be a worthwhile thing to hold, but you ought to give reasons why you declare it to be so. Aside from that, many people basically say that is the sum total of all ethics, while toher take it not as the end, but the beginning. First, do no harm.
Good point. Maybe it ought to be: First, do no unneccesary harm.
Unhappily that only brings on a case by case determination of when harming another is really necessary. And that brings on the examination of the whole ethical structure in regard to “necessary harm.”
I try to go by Buddhist precepts, trying to integrate them to my mind: Everyone is trying to find happiness, avoiding suffering, and I try to look at life that way; helping everyone avoid suffering. My own application involves all creatures, because I was blessed with an understanding of that from a young age, so can apply that well in further life choices.
At 45, I’ve accumulated , by good grace, a great deal of knowledge about my beloved field; botany, specifically, medicinal plants. Even more specifically, I was taught how to be able to get around in the Real World of nature by my step-dad biologist professor. I see, with current kids, that it’s not the norm, at all. I am trying to learn how to teach that to kids. That will be my service; to teach people to see a caterpillar as a sweet being, and to understand the metamorphosis from crawlie to beautiful butterfly, to understand the whole of nature. Very simple, to teach an appreciation of the small beauty of it all, to delight in that, and then heartily expand on it. I’ve found that to work well; the altruism of children and caterpillars!
You don’t owe anybody anything, with one exception: you are obligated to take care of any children you parent until such time as they have the ability to take care of themselves.
What you opt to do for someone else is left to your judgment.
A question to the “do no harm” crowd. How do you determine the harm you are doing? Is it intentional physical harm only? Driving to work could be construed as “doing harm” with air pollution. Having a nice warm meal “does harm” to those who toil below minimum wage to put that on your table. Where do you stop the slide towards primitive comunism?
Would you agree that my original point still stands? That a life of service to others (perhaps God first) is the highest ideal?