Don't you just have that warm fuzzy feeling every time you do a good deed? Whether it is helping someone with their car, feeding the homeless, or carrying the grocery for someone else; doesn't it just make you happy?
How often does that warm feeling come? How often do we really go out of our way to help each other?
Every time I do something good, I smile to myself, thinking what a good person I am. But what does it mean to be a "good person?" Doing these good deeds every so often and then giving yourself a pat on the back for it?
Awhile back, I saw a homeless person at the intersection of the street. I decided that, "Today, I will be that good person." I went to a Ralphs nearby and bought a sandwich, some random snack foods, and a huge water bottle. (I have a thing against just giving money to the homeless). I then proceeded to return back to the intersection but he was gone already.
Despite the deed not being carried through completely, I was so proud of myself. I thought, "Dang. I am such a good person to even do this."
Thinking back, I feel so ashamed to even say this.
Just because on that one day, in that one month, I decided to do something like this. That makes me so proud and be able to label myself as "good?" Really?
It just comes down to this: I don't help people often enough. These times are few and hard to come by which makes me feel that much more proud when I do do something. This is the real issue. How often do we lend out a hand and help those in need (not necessarily just the homeless, but how about your hurting neighbors?) When we see someone in need, we tend to ignore it thinking that "it's their problem not mine," "I'm sure they've got it figured out," or even "why should I?" And when we do decide to help, we feel good. We feel as if we ARE good people.
It's good to have that warm feeling. And it is definitely good to do good. But next time, I will for sure be a lot more humble. I don't give because I want to be known as good or because I want to make MYSELF feel better.
In the act of giving, the spotlight belongs to the person being helped, not oneself. That is something I will be sure to remember next time.
Have you helped someone today?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You can't help everyone in the world all the time. And you shouldn't help others if it results in a detriment to yourself.
ReplyDeleteBut I also think the meaning of "helping" someone is very vague. I think just talking with a friend and making them smile and laugh and enjoy their day is a way of helping someone.
Making someone's day better than it would have been is helping them!
yes, I agree, but what I was talking about is also inclusive of helping someone enjoy their day. What I think I didn't get across that well is that too often we are so engulfed in our own little world of ourselves, or maybe with a few friends and family, that we forget about our neighbors. We forget about people who need our help, be it the big things or even just a smile.
ReplyDeleteJump out of your comfort bubble. Know what I mean?
I agree with you that we don't help people.
ReplyDeletebut I agree with george that helping someone is vague and hard to understand.
Let's say you were able to follow through with the sandwich idea.
The man gets a meal for the day.
then what?
what about the next day?
are you gonna buy him another sandwich?
its not that easy
there's a proverb that says
"Give a Man a Fish, Feed Him For a Day. Teach a Man to Fish, Feed Him For a Lifetime"
if you really have to help him, you have to assess whether or not you have to capacity to do so and without creating detriments to yourself.
on a brighter note.
its not arrogance or self-satisfaction to be happy about helping someone.
if you help someone, they will be happy and you will be happy.
so everyone's happy.
another way to think about this, is the question, "what is best for a society?"
ReplyDeleteIs it better for everyone to have the same amount of happiness in their lives, or is it better to improve the person with the worst life, to make him happier?
Steph - you should see the economic principles in this...pareto efficiency. If I give a sandwich to him, it makes me worse off, so the outcome isn't pareto efficient.
In that case (giving him a sandwich), we are balancing out our happiness, balancing out our utility. I don't think it's good if everyone was on the same level of happiness.
But I agree with the idea of improving the utility of the person with the least amount of utility...albeit not by an individual, but by an organization/government.