I don’t have a concrete critique nor a complete non-critical opinion about all I read. A lot can be differently interpreted by different people with different backgrounds and different experiences. I had few ideas/questions raising to my mind as I was reading and I just would like to say them out loud. The idea of helping more in quantity is a philosophical dilemma, well known in the thought experiment of the train that we can decide which one of two tracks it can go on, where on one track there are 5 people and on the other track is one. (There’s a lot related to this thought experiment, that don’t fit here). And then there’s the idea of deciding on the sort of help one offers and its quality, as well as the quality of the choices one decides for and therefor trades off against other choices. This decision of which is which is also relative and differs from one person to the other. As an example, should resources (money, time, etc.) aimed to help people in refugee camps fleeing conflict zones be directed to feeding them and making their lives in the camps better or on education and empowerment? They need the fish and the fishing equipment and knowledge, but not all can be offered. Another example, is it more important to use limited resources on saving and hosting refugees fleeing dictatorship or supporting the people to overcome their dictators? Should we give it all to pan a right-extrimist party or to convey knowledge to the people to not support such a party and constructively weaken it over time while strengthening democracy and participation of people? I can go on with examples, but I think I made the idea clear. Once more, for me while thinking out loud and sharing my thoughts. Or am I delusional thinking about all this in this way?
I want to stress that I don’t mean that the text here is against what I just mentioned. I’m just saying that while reading I had these ideas/questions and I wouldn’t say that I have clear answers for them, not from my side nor to extract from the text. Nevertheless, it might be too philosophical(?) to comprehend matters this way!
I don’t have a concrete critique nor a complete non-critical opinion about all I read. A lot can be differently interpreted by different people with different backgrounds and different experiences. I had few ideas/questions raising to my mind as I was reading and I just would like to say them out loud. The idea of helping more in quantity is a philosophical dilemma, well known in the thought experiment of the train that we can decide which one of two tracks it can go on, where on one track there are 5 people and on the other track is one. (There’s a lot related to this thought experiment, that don’t fit here). And then there’s the idea of deciding on the sort of help one offers and its quality, as well as the quality of the choices one decides for and therefor trades off against other choices. This decision of which is which is also relative and differs from one person to the other. As an example, should resources (money, time, etc.) aimed to help people in refugee camps fleeing conflict zones be directed to feeding them and making their lives in the camps better or on education and empowerment? They need the fish and the fishing equipment and knowledge, but not all can be offered. Another example, is it more important to use limited resources on saving and hosting refugees fleeing dictatorship or supporting the people to overcome their dictators? Should we give it all to pan a right-extrimist party or to convey knowledge to the people to not support such a party and constructively weaken it over time while strengthening democracy and participation of people? I can go on with examples, but I think I made the idea clear. Once more, for me while thinking out loud and sharing my thoughts. Or am I delusional thinking about all this in this way?
I want to stress that I don’t mean that the text here is against what I just mentioned. I’m just saying that while reading I had these ideas/questions and I wouldn’t say that I have clear answers for them, not from my side nor to extract from the text. Nevertheless, it might be too philosophical(?) to comprehend matters this way!