How do we do philanthropy well?

The term philanthropy is thrown around our classroom on a daily basis, nonetheless is the title of this course, however distinguishing what is a philanthropic action may be an extremely difficult task for many of us to comprehend.  In tackling what constitutes, as charitable giving it is important to understand what philanthropy really is.  In my opinion I don’t believe that philanthropy is about who can donate the most money or time to a cause.  In order to call yourself a philanthropist you must be reaching your full potential to give back to your community, whether through donations or a commitment to a cause is unimportant, but having a passion to give back because we all should want to is what constitutes someone as being a philanthropist, because no matter how much you do there is always more that you could be doing.  The question of whether someone is a philanthropist or not is difficult to answer because although I don’t see myself as a philanthropist right now I do believe that I have the potential to become one some day.  Do you think that you are a philanthropist or do you see yourself in the position I am currently experiencing?

            Being involved in philanthropy should be a stress free experience because any kind of giving is good giving right? Wrong.  While reading the article The Giving Conundrum I felt an unsettling connection between her experiences with philanthropy with my own. Perhaps, since the author writes in a way that sounds younger she is more easily relatable, but I find her experiences familiar. The face of giving often leads us into challenges of where the best use of our time and money are going.  As critical thinkers we all want to put our efforts into causes that we believe will benefit from our support.  This unfortunately leads to a number of overwhelming questions, which the author experienced, that can consume us regarding who we should give to: ”Should I give more to smaller organizations and less to large ones, or visa versa? Should I give to the same organizations year after year or spread the wealth around? Should I focus locally, because we all have to start where we are? Or should I focus globally?”  All of these questions have definitely had an effect on my giving and opinions on who to give to, but it is difficult to say whether one organization deserves it more than another.  According to effective altruism we should choose the cause where we will make the most difference, but measuring this value is quite difficult and could be different in others opinions. A difficult task I have been trying to discover is that one issue area that I find most compelling.  Although it is encouraged to support a number of different causes I think a lot of people answer these questions easier with help from their own personal beliefs and passions.  For example if I had an experience with guide dogs like the author of Two Paths for Charitable Giving: From the Head or from the Heart, I may be more compelled to donate to causes for the blind or other handicaps that benefit from the use of guide dogs.  Do you believe that you are a more effective giver if you have a prior connection to a cause? Or should we only give logically from the head?

 If you are interested in whether you are being an effective philanthropist check out this video of Joy Sun’s Ted talk that takes a new route to solving poverty issues around the world.  In this video Joy tries to explore alternatives to how we are approaching charity.  In this experiment she encourages a method of charity in which the money is being transferred directly from the donors to the people it is being donated to.  With the use of technology an “unconditional cash transfer” with no strings attached allows the poor to empower themselves and be independent on their own.  Although I am still skeptical that all of the receivers actually use their donations in the most beneficial way, it is an interesting strategy to approach issues of poverty.  Do you think Joy’s strategy is successful or a disaster waiting to happen?

            Although I still have unanswered questions about my own efforts as a “philanthropist” I admire and believe everyone should give based on the value that Doris Buffet does, in that, “the best return is when lives change for the better in some way, that’s the commanding thought behind all I do.”  At the end of the day it doesn’t matter what cause you are helping, but that you are evoking positive change in some way.

Effective Altruism

In our class discussion today regarding effective altruism and the debate between philanthropy from the head versus the heart, my group made several interesting points. My personal opinion is that philanthropy and volunteering should be a product of both passion and calculation. Peter Singer’s argument took the calculation aspect to an extreme. He used the example of someone training a guide dog to demonstrate his point; if the money used to train and raise the guide dog was instead donated to help cure people of trachoma in Africa, between 400 and 2,000 people could be cured of blindness. However, if someone was passionate about both animals and helping people in need, they might feel as if training a guide dog is more fulfilling than simply donating their money. Additionally, I feel as if it is important for people to see the effects of their donations or volunteer work; philanthropy does not have to be beneficial to only one party. There is nothing wrong with the philanthropist getting a sense of fulfillment and satisfaction from their contributions.

This brings up another point relating to effective altruism, doing work at home versus in another country. The parochial view of philanthropy may seem selfish, but ultimately donating money close to home may give the philanthropist more control over where their money is going, and they may be able to make more informed decisions. Information is more easily accessible if the potential philanthropist can actually visit the affected people or places, or even just the organization that will be carrying out the efforts.

Ultimately, I feel as if discussions and debates over effective altruism are counterproductive. If an individual feels passionate about a cause and chooses to put time and effort towards it, they are more likely to spread the word about what they are doing, and may stick with the organization for a longer time and repeat their donations. If the same individual instead followed the guidelines for effective altruism to a perfect point, they might wind up contributing time and money to a cause they don’t have any passion for. They are then less likely to tell others about the cause, and they may not repeat their philanthropic gestures. Those who preach effective altruism should shift their values slightly and instead recognize the worth of being passionate about the cause one is contributing towards. This is not to say that organizations should not be properly researched before someone chooses to put their resources towards them, but simply that using both heart and head to choose how to behave philanthropically is a suitable option. Instead of being high and mighty about only donating to the most optimally effective organizations, people like Peter Singer and philanthropists who criticize others for not being as effective as themselves should appreciate and celebrate all acts of philanthropy.

Am I a Philanthropist?

The word philanthropist is intimidating. Maybe it’s all the syllables or letters that scares us. It’s easy to say “I volunteer”, “I donate time and money”, and “I believe in this cause with everything I got”, so why can’t we say “I am a philanthropist” without hesitation? We saw in the “I am a Philanthropist” video (the shorter one) people just like you and I say those four words with conviction and little doubt in themselves. But those four words, “I am a philanthropist”, are very strong and can have different meanings to different people. And while the people in the video believe it, do we? We brought up briefly in class about charity and philanthropy. As we discussed in class, there is a distinction between charity and philanthropy. And this distinction can give us a better picture of who is a philanthropist.

I am certain we can all say we have given to charity at some point in time whether it was giving money to someone from the Salvation Army outside a store during the Christmas season or donating a few cents to CHOW. But does that constitute philanthropy? The difference between charity and philanthropy revolves around a certain mindset. Charity is “the kindly or sympathetic disposition to aid the needy as a result of deep feeling or understanding of their misery or suffering” (acton.org) and Philanthropy is “goodwill toward one's fellow men especially as expressed through active efforts to promote human welfare” (acton.org). These two are different concepts but often we blur the lines and thus takes away from both acts of good. According the an article written by Karen Woods, “philanthropy, for all its good intentions, does not necessarily imply a personal connection with the needy person--though it can and sometimes does.” This is the prime reason that we get confused between philanthropy and charity. Take the example of Warren E. Buffet (as mentioned in the article as well in our class). When Buffet transferred $31 billion to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, he increased the foundation’s potential to make a big difference in the world. But the amount doesn’t really matter when trying to figure out why this action can be considered philanthropic. The gift of $31 billions dollars were given in order to help the Gates to expand their outreach to as many people as they possibly can. When we donate a dollar to the Salvation Army representative we are thinking about a temporary fix. Will the donation help along the way, yes, but why did we donate that dollar? We did it to help the person we all see on the streets trying to survive. Did your contribution help? It must have helped someone along the way (or did it?). But did you donate to help people or help your conscience? I will be the first person to admit that every time I pass the Salvation Army representatives I feel guilted into giving money. It’s hard to ignore. I might have a full wallet but I will only throw in some of my stray change while thinking about how much I donated to a similar cause just days earlier. Now, I swear that is not the mindset I have at all times, but it comes up often in similar situations. Personally I understand the need for money and time for several organizations, but is it “pity money” or money that was given solely to ensure that the mission of the receiving organization lives on. That is the problem many of us considered when we watched the PINK Fracking video in class and at home. Can a large donation truly be considered philanthropy if the person doesn’t acknowledge the mission of the organization? This question then brings us to consider who is a philanthropist?

To quote Buffet in a letter to his son, I think we can learn a lot about philanthropy: “A couple of thoughts (but not directives): Focus the new funds and your energy on a relatively few activities in which [your foundation] HGB can make an important difference. Concentrate your resources on needs that would not be met without your efforts. Conversely, avoid making small contributions to the multitude of worthwhile activities that have many possible funders and that would likely proceed without your help. Pay attention to your home community but favor a broader view. Judge programs by how they fit with your goals and their chances for success, not by who makes the request. Expect to make some mistakes; nothing important will be accomplished if you make only “safe” decisions.” These are definitely words that even a poor college student can learn from. Being a philanthropist means you are taking into account where your resources are going. I don’t know about all of you, but all my money is going into tuition so monetary donations are not my forte but I do give a lot of my time to the community. Thanks to the Public Service Learning Community I was able to visit many of the organizations that provide amazing services in the Binghamton community but found I felt more fulfilled when I focused on helping one or two organizations daily and to the best of my abilities. For me, education and caring for people who need a little help is very important. This is why I have decided to limit the time I dedicate for volunteering to two organizations on a weekly basis this semester. Now, to go back to the “I am a Philanthropist” video, we discussed if everyone was in it was truly a philanthropist and why. We could identify why most of the people in the video were considered a philanthropist except the magazine man. He bought the newsletter to support homeless people every week but could he considered a philanthropist? To the magazine man (I only call him that because it is catchy), his weekly contribution, in his mindset, was helping his cause and was the optimal way for him to get involved. One thing I have noticed about who we can call a philanthropist is that we can not judge any persons long withstanding contribution based on our perceptions of people. If the intention is there and the intention is focused then we all have the potential to become philanthropists. That why I think I can one day say , “I am a philanthropist”.

Link to the article I referenced: http://www.acton.org/pub/commentary/2006/07/12/charity-vs-philanthropy