Caring about others

I have cared more about the welfare of complete strangers more than members of my immediate family.

Why ?

Because with a complete stranger there is a chance they are not going to treat you as an outcast, a pariah, as you are the only one who speaks the truth about living as a terrorized hostage during the most formative years of your life.

Probably because we don't KNOW them. Easier to care about them than the ones we want to kick in the hiney, or snatch up and tell "Get it together, NOW!"

In my case anyways. But, I have a very interesting family.

Squinney - at least, you have a bearable family...

Yes, certainly "bearable" within our home.

I was thinking more of a couple of my siblings.

John Donne may well answer your question, with his Meditation XVII:

PERCHANCE he for whom this bell tolls may be so ill, as that he knows not it tolls for him; and perchance I may think myself so much better than I am, as that they who are about me, and see my state, may have caused it to toll for me, and I know not that. The church is Catholic, universal, so are all her actions; all that she does belongs to all. When she baptizes a child, that action concerns me; for that child is thereby connected to that body which is my head too, and ingrafted into that body whereof I am a member. And when she buries a man, that action concerns me: all mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated; God employs several translators; some pieces are translated by age, some by sickness, some by war, some by justice; but God's hand is in every translation, and his hand shall bind up all our scattered leaves again for that library where every book shall lie open to one another. As therefore the bell that rings to a sermon calls not upon the preacher only, but upon the congregation to come, so this bell calls us all; but how much more me, who am brought so near the door by this sickness. There was a contention as far as a suit (in which both piety and dignity, religion and estimation, were mingled), which of the religious orders should ring to prayers first in the morning; and it was determined, that they should ring first that rose earliest. If we understand aright the dignity of this bell that tolls for our evening prayer, we would be glad to make it ours by rising early, in that application, that it might be ours as well as his, whose indeed it is. The bell doth toll for him that thinks it doth; and though it intermit again, yet from that minute that that occasion wrought upon him, he is united to God. Who casts not up his eye to the sun when it rises? but who takes off his eye from a comet when that breaks out? Who bends not his ear to any bell which upon any occasion rings? but who can remove it from that bell which is passing a piece of himself out of this world?

No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee. Neither can we call this a begging of misery, or a borrowing of misery, as though we were not miserable enough of ourselves, but must fetch in more from the next house, in taking upon us the misery of our neighbours. Truly it were an excusable covetousness if we did, for affliction is a treasure, and scarce any man hath enough of it. No man hath affliction enough that is not matured and ripened by and made fit for God by that affliction. If a man carry treasure in bullion, or in a wedge of gold, and have none coined into current money, his treasure will not defray him as he travels. Tribulation is treasure in the nature of it, but it is not current money in the use of it, except we get nearer and nearer our home, heaven, by it. Another man may be sick too, and sick to death, and this affliction may lie in his bowels, as gold in a mine, and be of no use to him; but this bell, that tells me of his affliction, digs out and applies that gold to me: if by this consideration of another's danger I take mine own into contemplation, and so secure myself, by making my recourse to my God, who is our only security.

Is John Donne related to Asherman ? Because I read that 5 times and it didn't make any bloody sense to me.

Re: Caring about others


I believe that one. I don't believe a person can care or hate someone that they do not know. I believe you can care/hate the things a person does or what they stand for, but how can you care about or hate someone whom you have never met? You don't know them.

For instance, Hitler. Do I hate the man? No, I never knew the man. He died many years before I was born. I have no grudge or emotion toward a moldy pile of bones that are lying 6 feet under somewhere in the world. What I can hate are the things he did. The abominable acts of atrocity that he spawned onto this world, I can most definitely hate those-and I do.

Do I care for the starving child in Africa? I do not know her. I sympathize for her, I know how I would feel if it were someone I knew in her dilemma. I do what I can to help change things for the better in my own way. Things like food drives and donations to charities and awareness campaigns. Those are all to help the idea, though. Stop HUNGER in these countries not save this individual child because you know and love her.

Reading back over this it all sounds like something cruel to say and believe. I'm not a callous person, it's just my view point on human emotions and the limits they physically have.

In my opinion, knowing someone has nothing to do with how we feel about them.

As to if people can genuinely CARE about someone they don't know, that's a tricky one. If you go with the assumption that you must know someone to love that person, then no. If you feel love does not depend on who or what the other person is, then yes.

I personally believe people are capable of caring about others who they do not know.

I do see how it is harder though. People need something to relate and connect to: like a face, a touch, an experience, etc. That is why organizations and parties try to give themselves a 'face'. It's easier for people to identify with and care about a human being than an idea. Like Al said about the girl in Africa - if you just see her as a number or an abstract idea and not as a single person you can imagine, it's very difficult to care.

I have people whom I have never met in person that I care a great deal about. A perfect case in point, are many of the members here on A2K.
Simply because our lives have not intertwined physically, does not mean they have not intertwined emotionally.

Some good points being made here.

I'd just like to add that empathy grows out of experience.
So does imagination.

Being able to 'put yourself in the other person's shoes' is not always an easy task, but if you have experienced anything similar to what they are suffering- no matter where in the world they may be... it is hard NOT to care, because you understand a little of how they FEEL.

Having said that - I do think that in this present political climate, you have to be brave or mad to admit that you give a damn, especially when you know you will get attacked for it.

I was in the pub the other day, talking to some mates about Iraq - when I voiced concern over the use of cluster bombs and napalm in civvy areas. A lonesome, drunken youth propped against the bar mumbled the words 'P^ki-lover'.

I chose to ignore the remark because I have been a lonesome, drunken youth propped at many bars in my time and if there is one thing I learnt from that it is empathy for youthful over-indulgence. :wink:

Peace,
E

Yes, the measure of our progress is the extent to which we care for the other. This is a tenet of most world religions. Sadly, it is largely ignored in today's world.

I'm not a religionist. If I were, I would want to be judged based on the extent of my care for the other.

I believe that the problem with some people is that they are ignorant. People may be able to vaguely think that they know what the feeling is like, but then they don't "care" about it, and thus they're basically not accepting that the other person's feeling truly exist. It's like I can say that I like being ill, but when I become sick, I realize how I was wrong.

Donne marking.

"Because with a complete stranger there is a chance they are not going to treat you as an outcast, a pariah, as you are the only one who speaks the truth about living as a terrorized hostage during the most formative years of your life."

Our situation is somewhat different in that all my siblings have done relatively well financially. I've always been the "pariah" of our family, because they are all christians and republicans, while I am an atheist and independent. They treat me well, however. They all attended my 70th birthday party earlier this month.

When I travel to foreign countries with Grand Circle Travel or Overseas Adventure Travel, we are usually treated to a visit at a school, so I bring school supplies with me. I have sent money and/or school supplies to schools after my return home. Many stores are now having sales on school supplies, so I buy them now to bring later.

Re: Caring about others


we all live on the same planet, so there are two things. one is proximity, how close you are. the other is how much of a good story it is. someitmes things are just stories, and if you know they are real then you can sympathize with it more, cause you know that whatever caused that is a real thing that is similar to your own experience, not different like in some fantasy book. aside from that, if you don't know someone, how could you possibly know if you'd care for them or not? you have to get to know someone before you know if you'd like them, and then therefor care for them.