>Is it right to put our own ‘higher pleasures/happiness’ before other’s who are more desperate?
>We all buy extravagancies we don’t need, from wii’s and x-box’s to cars and widescreen t.v’s. Yet we also all know that there are people suffering and dying in the world who don’t have the basic requirements (food, water etc). The basic idea is this – I always wonder how people can live their lives the way they do and still believe that they are good people when they know this, and could give up what I will call their ‘higher pleasures’, to help others more desperate.
At the moment my personal answer is that those of us who believe they are largely good are either stupid or ignorant. Of course we do the occasional ‘good’ things, however none of you (us) will do something as trivial as buying one less bottle of vodka for a party, or one less dvd, and instead give that money to charity (even if it means saving the life of someone wev’e never met for food or water, because thats about the equivelant cost).
It can also be said though, that as individuals we can only feel our own happiness/sadness etc – which makes it more potent than other peoples. For instance you can hear on the news that 5000 people have died – and when asked if they would trade their own lives instead, most people would say no.
Personally I believe that we are a lot more selfish than we are willing to admit, and are often only prepared to help those who share the same blood (if, for instance, it means carrying on our genes) or those who we know well, and I can’t see how any other answer would coup d’etat mine, but responses are welcome. But we can’t kid ourselves that we wouldn’t go to Hell if it exists (which it doesn’t). As always you’ve been a wonderful audience, now stop being selfish – peace out.