Delete comment from: The Splintered Mind
I’ve found that when I talk about philosophical arguments for charitable giving (or altruistically motivated career choice), they generally become contentious. People feel judged, pressured, or hear it as arrogant.
On the other hand, when I present the same conclusions in the context of a story or simple statement, it generates a more agreeable response. Pure anecdote, but very consistent in my experience. It would be interesting to see the argument vs narrative presented as a “personal statement” and to gauge people’s perceptions of the person’s character or personality.
For example, I was originally planning to become a doctor, but deviated toward studying policy and economics due to philosophical and marginal benefit analysis of the two professions. When I tell people that I feel I can do more good as a policy analyst or congressional staffer than I could as a doctor, they seem to hear it as arrogant, or as putting down doctors. On the other hand, when I say “the healthcare system is very robust already, and there are already lots of great doctors. I want to help fix our broken government,” people approve much more. For short, I just say “I got more interested in the policy side of things.”
Agreeable reaction is a different metric than immediate charitable giving, of course. I wonder if outcomes differ for amount of giving, whether that money comes out of your bank account or as a percentage of possible lottery earnings. What about willingness to do some volunteer labor or spread awareness? The former might be hard to test, but I’m sure there are small tests that would work for the latter. Perhaps ask respondents if they’re willing to write a note expressing their support for the cause for a petition.
Apr 25, 2019, 1:17:31 PM
Posted to Narrative but Not Philosophical Argument Motivates Giving to Charity