The Practicality of Altruism
I went to watch a play a couple of weeks ago. It was a play in Mandarin entitled Trash. Yeah. Mandarin. Haha. For all of you who think I only eat potatoes (I happen to like rice and noodles too), nyah nyah nyah. Ahem. Sorry. Anyway, the play (like most locally written plays) is a parody making a statement about the three sociological circles of Singapore society vis-a-vis: the civic circle, the civil circle and the commercial circle (how's that for alliteration!). The play talks about a fictitious country (they always are fictitious aren't they?) in the future, where the country aims to be the first in everything, and where everything is so regulated you'd need a permit to get pregnant (I kid you not!).
The play of course makes a very strong statement against over-regulation. And yes, I do have to agree with its basic premise. However, within the play, there was also a superhero character, who wanted to bring utopia to earth, where everyone was considered equal and everyone would receive his fair share.
Which begs the question: how fair is fair?
Is the amount Bill Gates earns every hour fair? Or must Bill, despite his absolute genius in computers, share his immense wealth with everyone around the world? Should our ministers, whose salaries are currently pegged at the top 5% of the CEOs in the country, tithe 95% of their pay to us poor church mice? Should the archbishop of Singapore, who earns almost as much as our ministers, do the same? I guess the answer, tempting as it may be to say the opposite, is no.
No matter how much we say we are all equal, there is and always will exist inequality amongst humans. We used to be differentiated by race. Now we are differentiated by religion. My ideal is when we are differentiated by ability, and only ability. It is the ability to adapt, to survive and to rise to the top of the heap that will garner us our rewards. If we were to be socialist or communist in nature, have equal distribution, steal from the justly rich to give to the justly poor, then a spirit of disillusionment and listlessness will set in.
It is for that reason that discrimination and elitism must survive. Not in terms of race, or religion, or nationality or accident of birth, or language or region or any other surface characteristic. Discrimination and elitism must arise from one's abilities, and the desire and wherewithal to rise to the top of the heap in as honourable and as honest a manner as possible. We must rise on the shoulders of talent which we recognise and bring with us. And yes, we must discriminate and be biased against those who refuse to stand on their own two feet.
When you see a beggar, before giving him your twenty cents, observe him. Is he able? Is he willing and has a desire to improve his lot? If he is, then let him be part of your enterprise. But if he begs as a choice, because he believes in free handouts, then deride him; for society has no place for garbage such as he.
Such is the practicality of altrusim. Help only those who are willing to rise above their lot.
The play of course makes a very strong statement against over-regulation. And yes, I do have to agree with its basic premise. However, within the play, there was also a superhero character, who wanted to bring utopia to earth, where everyone was considered equal and everyone would receive his fair share.
Which begs the question: how fair is fair?
Is the amount Bill Gates earns every hour fair? Or must Bill, despite his absolute genius in computers, share his immense wealth with everyone around the world? Should our ministers, whose salaries are currently pegged at the top 5% of the CEOs in the country, tithe 95% of their pay to us poor church mice? Should the archbishop of Singapore, who earns almost as much as our ministers, do the same? I guess the answer, tempting as it may be to say the opposite, is no.
No matter how much we say we are all equal, there is and always will exist inequality amongst humans. We used to be differentiated by race. Now we are differentiated by religion. My ideal is when we are differentiated by ability, and only ability. It is the ability to adapt, to survive and to rise to the top of the heap that will garner us our rewards. If we were to be socialist or communist in nature, have equal distribution, steal from the justly rich to give to the justly poor, then a spirit of disillusionment and listlessness will set in.
It is for that reason that discrimination and elitism must survive. Not in terms of race, or religion, or nationality or accident of birth, or language or region or any other surface characteristic. Discrimination and elitism must arise from one's abilities, and the desire and wherewithal to rise to the top of the heap in as honourable and as honest a manner as possible. We must rise on the shoulders of talent which we recognise and bring with us. And yes, we must discriminate and be biased against those who refuse to stand on their own two feet.
When you see a beggar, before giving him your twenty cents, observe him. Is he able? Is he willing and has a desire to improve his lot? If he is, then let him be part of your enterprise. But if he begs as a choice, because he believes in free handouts, then deride him; for society has no place for garbage such as he.
Such is the practicality of altrusim. Help only those who are willing to rise above their lot.
posted by ekkie at 1:37 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home