Hairdressers vs Shipbuilders in the Cosmic Importance Stakes

[Auld-Kelpie]

Originally posted by Fear_nam_Beanntan
I was using the phrase works of charity in the theological sense i.e. works that spring from love. I was not referring to all works which help the less fortunate.

Works that spring from love? I know that English is a bit lacking when it comes to defining this word, but having been around for a few summers; I have known many claim such was their motivation, but found when closely examined; nothing could be further from the truth.
The ability to fool self is a major part of the human predicament.
Loud protestations of worth; in motivation or endeavour; are the smokescreen of the emotionally deprived & sometimes corrupt. The human being is motivated by & for self. You feel good about what you do for others, not of your genetic lineage? Ask yourself just what is it you are getting in return? An honest question could find you a surprising answer. To delve below the level of training & indoctrination could be another matter though, & preclude knowledge of anything but the surface trivia of assumption.

[ScabbyDouglas]

I honestly am in a quandary here.

Part of me says: There is no reason to suppose that anything I do as a person is worth more or less than something someone else does. If I scratch my behind, or someone else cuts their toenails - those actions are of equal value. If I eat a pie, and someone else drinks coffee, then there's still nothing in it.
At what point do my actions become significant?

At the point when they impinge upon other people?

But they already have. If I drink coffee, I'm paying money to an international conglomerate who may pay starvataion wages to their workers. And I've denied money to the bakers where they make the pies.

Some of us make choices of that sort, buying Fairtrade products and so on... but its an interesting thought.

Feartie's point about "moral perfection" is harder for me to accept. It presupposes a set of moral standards that are already known and accepted. And we know that different cultures have widely separate viewpoints on many topics such as sex, alcohol, gender roles, etc.. etc.

One person's perfection would be another's degeneracy I think.

[Auld-Kelpie]

I have to agree with ScabbyDouglas here; for every action there is a reaction & the interpretation of outcomes, from any action, is beyond the capacity of mankind. The most charitable of actions can lead to horrendous outcomes & all the wishing it back, in the world, won’t change anything. The assumption to know, who makes the greatest contribution or destruction, with any given act, is the arrogance that continues to destroy hope in all cultures.
We know a great deal about cause & affect within a relative time frame, but do not have the capacity to encompass the ripples that flow in all directions. We end back at the hypothesis of the butterfly & the hurricane. Mankind should endeavor to comprehend all things;-- him/herself first of all-- & please whatever gods;-- tempered with humor & compassion.

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

Originally posted by Auld-Kelpie
Works that spring from love? I know that English is a bit lacking when it comes to defining this word, but having been around for a few summers; I have known many claim such was their motivation, but found when closely examined; nothing could be further from the truth.

I will qualify what I mean by love. I am referring to altruistic, self-sacrificing love (agape, caritas, etc.)

Originally posted by Auld-Kelpie
Loud protestations of worth; in motivation or endeavour; are the smokescreen of the emotionally deprived & sometimes corrupt.

True.

Originally posted by Auld-Kelpie
The human being is motivated by & for self.

That's the beauty of Christianity. It actually demands that it's adherents conform to a moral standard which is contrary to human nature.

[Auld-Kelpie]

[

Originally posted by Auld-Kelpie
The human being is motivated by & for self.

That's the beauty of Christianity. It actually demands that it's adherents conform to a moral standard which is contrary to human nature. [/b][/quote]

Christianity does not have exclusivity on this, & it is unhelpful to clarity of discussion to portray it as such.
The golden rule is part of most of the worlds’ faiths.
Christianity has no more proven claim to success in this field than any other religion. Louder more strident voices yes; more money yes, more temporal power yes, but freedom from ulterior motives in any of its works? The Jury is still out after 2000 years.

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

We may not have a monopoly on the golden rule, but we do have a monopoly on most of the rest of the sermon on the mount.

[Fear_nam_Beanntan]

I agree that giving away money has little moral value if it was surplus money that you didn't know what to do with. However, I disagree that in order to be moral a person must do something they don't want to do. I believe we should give until it hurts, and want to do so.