In my last post I asked the question: WHY DO YOU GIVE?

As I mulled about the issue it became clearer that no one who gives does it purely for unselfish reasons. Now, I hope I am not being jaded about this but coming across Tovia Smith’s article “Selfish Giving: Does it count if you get in return?”, I found myself agreeing with most of her observations.

Tovia points out how nowadays businesses give to charity because they “have to”. It’s an image thing. But so what? They’re businesses after all and we do expect them to think about their bottom line. However, Tovia also points out that its pretty much the same with “high school kids signing up for their community service trip — the summer before their college applications are due. It’s simply what they have to do to be competitive.”

It sounds awful but if you really think about it these people are not the only “selfish” givers. Even those who do it because of their belief, as I pointed out in my last post, give for future rewards: in Buddhism and Hinduism its for good karma, for Christians it’s for God’s Blessing and whatever their reward awaits them in heaven, for Muslims the “Zakat” purifies their wealth and is done in obedience it Allah. While it is true that their primary reason for giving may not primarily be material rewards, and may not even be in this lifetime, they still do it for a reason other than giving.

So does anyone really give for the pure joy of giving? Maybe. Maybe not.

In my opinion this is not the point though. The point is that giving is “good” and as Rory Morton, dean of students at Buckingham Browne & Nichols School in Cambridge said, “…once they go do it [give/do community service], they get into it. And that’s good enough for me.”

The answers to WHYs are important but sometimes we have to stop asking and just be thankful that we can do something noble and good as giving and in top of that get something in return, whether that be material, spiritual, or emotional.

Giving is a concept that can be found in most religions – if not all.

It is espoused by both the Bible and the Qur’an. In fact if you look at the following verses you’ll be struck by the similarity of what the two religions tell their believers to do.

Giving shows the believers’ love for their God:

“And they feed, for the love of Allah, the poor, the orphan, and the captive.” (Qur’an 76:8)

“If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.” (1 John 3: 17-18)

Giving in secret:

“If you give alms openly, it is well, and if you hide it and give it to the poor, it is better for you” (Qur’an 2:271)

“But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.” (Matthew 6:3-43)

There are other similarities such as the concept of “tithing” wherein a portion of a person’s earning should be given back to the church.

Generosity is also encouraged in Buddhism and Hinduism. In Buddhism they have what they call dāna, which when translated means generosity. However, it means more than just the word but actually refers to the practice of cultivating generosity. To Buddhists the more they give selflessly in this life the better off they will be in the next life. A belief that even Christians whose “treasures are stored up in heaven” and Muslims also believe.

The question now though is this: With all the teachings of different religions telling us to give are you practicing what you say you believe in? Do you give? In what way? How much? And more importantly, WHY?

You can find more info on giving to HAITI at Google’s Haiti Crisis Response Page.

Envy is an emotion everyone has at some point felt and needed to contend with. But what exactly is envy? When can you say that you are envious and when are you jealous? Is there are difference between the two? Is envy necessarily bad? All these questions about envy are answered in by Justin D’Arms’ paper on Envy. There he discussed the nature of envy, its rationality, and its relation to justice.

What interested me most about the whole article though is how he showed that envy is not always irrational and that despite the fact that it is often painted in a negative manner, even being considered to be one of the seven deadly sins, it can actually be benign. However, I we all understand why envy has earned its nasty reputation what with all the negative things that do tend to happen or at least the negative emotions that are invoked when the green-eyed monster makes it appearance. To be able to understand the whole concept of envy though and see why it can actually be benign, one needs to first understand its basic nature based on its definition and according to the following philosophers envy can be defined as follows:

Envy is pain at the good fortune of others. (Aristotle, Rhetoric, Bk II, Chapter 10)

Envy is a propensity to view the well-being of others with distress, even though it does not detract from one’s own. [It is] a reluctance to see our own well-being overshadowed by another’s because the standard we use to see how well off we are is not the intrinsic worth of our own well-being but how it compares with that of others. [Envy] aims, at least in terms of one’s wishes, at destroying others’ good fortune. (Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals 6:45)

In short, as D’Arms puts it arises from comparing how well you are doing with others. For the in-depth (and very fascinating) discussion on envy read Justin D’Arms’ article on Envy.

Image Source: Digerati Life

People like through around the world perfectionist nowadays but when you use the word are you really referring to – the philosophy or the psychology? Chances are that you’ve used the term perfectionist in both contexts at different times.

Perfectionism in psychology is defined as “a BELIEF that perfection can and must be obtained.” On the other hand, in philosophy it is defined as “the persistence of will in obtaining the optimal quality of spiritual, mental, physical, and material being.” Though they may sound pretty much the same since both aspires for the best possible results, however the major and critical difference lies in that the philosophy of perfectionism does not believe that perfection can actually be obtained.

Another thing that the term perfectionism share whether as a philosophical concept or as the psychological state of a person is that it does not always result in happy people. When it comes to psychology most people are already probably aware of the problems perfectionism can bring. Pathological perfectionists tend to obsess to much about perfection believing that anything less than perfect is as good worthless and since, unless you are a perfectionist, we know that perfection is unattainable then the person ends up disappointed time and again. When it comes to philosophy perfectionism can end up in discord primarily because people usually have differing ideas on what constitutes the best possible life, hence, an individual belonging in group may end up unhappy since the group has decided to strive for something that is not really what that person values in life.

Changing jobs is part of life. We all need to move on at some point in our lives. In this day and age, we can’t very well be expected to stay in one place for the rest of our lives. Yet even in cases like these, we are expected to think things through and to follow certain ethics.

Take this example. Company A has been in operation for several years. After 4 years of operation, most of its employees feel frustrated. They have gone as high as they could in the ranks and discontent is the general prevailing feeling. A competing company opens within the city, unknown to the upper management. This competing company offers a higher salary and better terms. The people within the company also deemed it necessary to try and hire the most skilled people in the original company.
Naturally, these things are kept secret from the original company.

The question now is the ethics involved – not from the perspective of the newly formed rival company but in the part of the employees who are being pirated, for the lack of a better word. Is there something wrong in them wanting to leave their current job for greener pastures? Isn’t that something normal and expected?

I’d have to say that leaving for greener pastures is all well and fine BUT leaving and immediately working for a rival company when you have an agreement with your current company NOT to work with a similar group until after 1 year of leaving is something else. Oh, did I leave that fact out in the beginning?

Here’s your question – would you do what these employees are doing? Or would you be more ethical (and perhaps less practical)?

During the time of Martin Luther King Jr., we can recall how rowdy most of us were as far as colored presidents were concerned. King was certainly disliked and even lead to his assassination in April 4, 1968. He was standing at the second floor balcony of the Lorraine Motel when he was shot.

It is no secret that majority of the people back then had a thing for the blacks. But today, we find ourselves on the verge of having another black President in the person of Barrack Obama.

But unlike before, we do not see rowdy people cursing and threatening Obama. That is excluding John McCain, his opponent of course who has used advertising mediums to get some leverage as far as their race is concerned. Apparently we see that it is all for naught as Obama is still leading thus far and officially.

Anyway, with all the discriminations left in the past, we are in a new era where political philosophy seems to be entirely better. It is more about what the person can provide rather than what he looks like. It has been a philosophy that we normally believe in even in real life. So if a black president can lead us to better tomorrows then why not?

So as long as we are in the era of being more rational and livid, let us keep it that way. We need all the help we can get and it does not matter if you are black or white!

From the eyes of an ordinary consumer, the financial bailout is bound to point to only one thing, save the debt-ridden country from collapsing and nothing else. If only that were the case in doing business then perhaps we would have seen a lot of businesses surviving and economies rising. Sadly, the philosophy of it all is that business is done more than plain business.

There are more business components to consider. One of which is business policies that are sure to be varied, depending on the philosophy of the management team tasked to establish the business venture and create a profit overall. If something goes wrong along the way, you are sure to note that it is not plainly a matter of infusing cash and paying off debt. For how can a business go on surviving if such debts will just accrue over time?

Also, as far as the recourse provided by the government is concerned, it is more than just paying off debt. In exchange, various arrangements such as a stake in the company in the event they fail to settle their financial bailout loan is pegged as one of the key highlights in exchange for a loan. Is that feasible?

As far as companies are concerned, it may be the last hurrah for them. Rather than filing for bankruptcy, they are left with little choices. So in the event they still falter, then the company may give way to political power. If that would be the case, at least they tried and now pass the problem to the government powers. In the end, it is similar to applying a loan using your business as collateral.

Makes you think of the government has a dirty hand in it all. But if that is the philosophy they are applying then they just have to honor it, especially if they sign on the dotted line.

Climate change and global warming issues have so far pushed us to lead eco-friendly lives. Many term it as going green but while others are able to cope and understand what it really means to really live an eco-conscious world, the fact remains that the whole philosophy surrounding eco-friendliness has to be further enhanced.

For one, many associate it with the color green. So with that in mind, trees, plants and nature are the first things that come into mind. This is partly true but if you want to generalize the whole eco-friendly philosophy, there is more to it that meets the eye. There is a reason why global warming and climate change are tagged part of it and if you would have your way, chances are you may discover that the branches included in it go a whole lot deeper.

You are bound to hear this topics when eco-friendly is in the air:

1. Recycling
2. Organic Living
3. Animal Extinction
4. Endangered Species
5. Alternative Energy
6. Alternative Fuel

Each of these topics are in a niche of their own. Sum them all up and they comprise the whole essence of global warming and climate change. But if you take on them separately, you may be surprised to note that they are only about 5% roughly if you want to sum up their relevance to global warming.

Al Gore hit it right when he addressed this issue. Apparently he is vindicated and today, many of us are finding our own way on how to survive this unusual glitch we are mainly responsible for.

If the US government can easily decide and fight for providing aid to the business sector, expect a lot of issues to come up. For one, any business for that matter can simply declare financial instability and seek financial assistance from the US. That is as simple as that and the value of truly engaging in business may yet lose its luster. A Bush Blunder? Perhaps. The intention was good but that fact is that if you lack the business knowledge to understand the mechanics of proper business operation ethics, chances are you have made a decision out of impulse.

President Bush cannot be entirely blamed. He is simply looking out for the welfare of his country. But while that is obvious, it is also a move which many foresee as lacking in deliberation and analysis. You can pass on the bill to Congress for approval. But wait a minute. Who are the people in congress? Political figures too right?

So if common sense were to be inserted, who in his right mind would not vote for the bill? They are part of the whole mess and if they are not careful, they may be placing themselves close to recession and economic turmoil. And if you are in that concerned country, where would you get the liberal mind to vote against it?

The world is watching and surely many sectors are keeping quiet. It is a move many are criticizing. Only time will tell on whether their own personal philosophies will indeed be ratified as far as doing business is concerned.

As far as the elections are concerned, it is not purely about making promises. It is about which philosophy that either McCain or Obama believe in to which people will surely believe as well. There are patterns. For sure, each political platform follows a specific agenda. There are exceptions though. Some of them may even focus on the issues at hand, the latest of which is that of the business debacle hitting and affecting the whole world to date.

It is easy to declare a business philosophy based on their promises. But the real problem lies on seeing it happen. Once placed into office, there is no guarantee that their claims will truly materialize. For one, politics is a matter of priorities meaning that not all claims and itineraries that were declared can push through.

You don’t have to figure out who will win or who will stick by their word. Either way, these political aspirants cannot give you a 100% guarantee. It has been proven anywhere that not all political shenanigans are indeed done. Especially considering that business needs are one of the most delicate topics that no one dares touch at the moment, it remains that people just have to figure out how to go about it independently.

Sadly, politicians are not included in the mix. They can lead but leading in all factors needed to be addressed is something that has to be questioned.