When I go to Starbucks, in addition to satisfying my consumerist

Spook,mainly,though if you know you're helping the children and recycling due to your own egoist nature,then it's not a spook.

>>1458568
Spaces go after commas, my friend.

>>1458668
Punc,tuation is a spoo.k

File: 1d17aeca89706b2d4c40683aa31dae68.jpg (50KB, 736x353px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 736x353px

>>1458672
Timothy pls go

>>1458568
No one admits they do those things to satisfy their ego. Most people are not aware of it, as becoming aware would serve to shatter how they see themselves.

>>1458038
Pretending to care, or thinking it is everybody's job to take care of the Earth is a spook.

Willingly going out of your way to recycle, or buying from non-profits and such consciously is not a spook because you know exactly why you are doing it.

Your own existence is a spook. t. Buddha

>>1458772
>Willingly going out of your way to recycle, or buying from non-profits and such consciously is not a spook because you know exactly why you are doing it.
You don't understand. The point is that doing those things has little impact on the world beyond making you feel good. Recycling, for instance, is insignificant because most of the waste in landfills does not come from households. Even if you manage to recycle every coke can you get your hands on. every scrap of paper, etc, it still won't matter. Even if everyone in your neighborhood or in your whole country recycled with perfect efficiency, that would only divert like 5% of recyclables going to landfills. Charities should be obvious; charities actually helped the poor starving African children with the flies on their faces, we would see a reduction in charities of this kind indicating a reduction of poor starving children with flies on their faces. That is obviously not the case, and unless you pack up your shit and go to Africa to help the little children, you ultimately have no control over whether or not your money actually goes towards helping them. You may as well just throw a coin into a fountain and wish good fortune for little Mbembe because it will ultimately have the same effect. The failure of Kony 2012, which no one ever mentions anymore, is a shameful reminder to many that slacktivism does little beyond inflating participants' egos.

File: ethics-trolley-cart-dilemma-20m9ul2.jpg (44KB, 506x267px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 506x267px

>>1458810
That raises a larger question than whether or not charity is a "Spook", and moreso focuses on Ethics. If someone honestly believes that a 5% recycling efficiency is worthwhile then they are not driven by a "spook". Now if someone believes their extra pair of Toms helped some African child who is starving, then yes they have been "spooked". But a person who conscientiously goes out of their way to try to help without pretending to be the next Jesus is not believing a spook, they are simply trying to help.

>>1458837
>That raises a larger question than whether or not charity is a "Spook"
I would argue that it is, because it acts as a barrier to meaningful action by allowing people to be satisfied with meaningless action

>>1458864
I would still claim this is an ethical dilemma moreso than a spook.

I know that if I donate $10 to keep an African Child fed that that $10 does not go directly to a child, but to me any amount is better than nothing because I personally will not devote my entire life by moving to the country.

Honestly, saying that I need to move to directly help people in order to be called Charity is a spook

>>1458927
My point is that by giving $10 dollar (which is a practically meaningless action) you satisfy your urge to help, making it easier to justify failing to provide actual meaningful aid

>>1458931
>that by giving $10 dollar (which is a practically meaningless action) ... justify failing to provide actual meaningful aid

This is the ethical dilemma. I can justify that anything is better than nothing, you are splitting hairs by saying not dropping all other priorities I am not truly a charitable person

>>1458971
>I can justify that anything is better than nothing, you are splitting hairs by saying not dropping all other priorities I am not truly a charitable person

I'm not saying that you have to drop all other priorities, I am simply saying that charity allows people to satisfy their urge to help with a fundamentally meaningless action, and that this has the effect of making genuinely meaningful action more difficult because the motivation for it is already satisfied

>>1458976
The idea of "genuine" vs "ingenuine" is a spook in and of itself.

This is a worthy ethical question, but calling charity a "spook" is a meme.

>>1459036
Charity as it currently exists is a spook

>>1459050
Not as long as I understand that charity is not a 1 to 1 ratio

>>1459058
It is as long as it acts as a barrier to meaningful action, which it does

>>1459050
What about something like 'doctors without borders'. You can't be a doctor, but you can help fund them.

Ultimately though, my taxes pay for aid (or they would if I paid tax lel), carrot-and-stick though that aid may be, it is probably going to be more pragmatic than any NGO. Ditto the church.

>>1459072
No it doesn't, as I mentioned it is unrealistic for everyone to give up their own existence to sustain another's. How exactly is donating 10 dollars stopping someone from selling their property to move to Sudan to educate the population?

Stop using "Spook" incorrectly, read a book instead of a page on a meme website.

>>1458750

>Timothy Dexter

Boy I wish I had heard of this guy earlier. This shit is marvelous.