If the world is like a spaceship then there are limited resources. We should all share and try not to trash the place. Garrett Hardin, author of this article, argues against these people who naively hold this belief. He says that instead of the world being a spaceship, it is actually more like a lifeboat. The rich are inside the boat and the poor are trying to get in it. He continues his analogy. If a lifeboat already holds 50 people, but there are 100 people in the water, what should we do?
We could let them all in, but then the boat would break and everyone would drown instead. “Complete justice, complete catastrophe.” Could we just choose a few more people to get in the boat? How should we choose each person? Could we just drive the boat away before people get on it? What could we do “adrift in a moral sea”?
I recently saw the film 2012 and it reminds me too much of this article. In the movie, the world is coming to an end. Governments across the world know that the end is near. However, they chose not to tell the public in fear of causing panic. Ships are built to withstand the earth’s destruction but there are only limited spaces for people. Only a select few can purchase tickets at a steep price. There are those who sneak on the boat. Ultimately a decision is made to let people onto the ship.
These are the kind of situations this article addresses. The idea of lifeboat ethics is applied to the “tragedy of the commons”, immigration policy, overpopulation and world hunger and poverty.
To keep this blog short, I will address only a few of these. The World Food Bank is an organization that gives food to poor countries. Garrett Hardin argues that this is not necessarily a good thing. If you look into the past, there have been similar organizations that have tried to do this same thing. These organizations have profited immensely while pretending to be “humanitarian”. It seems like these sorts of organizations are selfish, not selfless. This is not the only dilemma. If organizations like these keep providing food to poor countries they will never learn. Let me explain. Overpopulation will become a bigger problem. Because people are not educated, they have more kids. These countries will not learn to feed their own people, but instead become reliant on organizations that are trying to help them. In the long run, it only hurts them.
This is the idea of lifeboat ethics. It may not alleviate immediate pain and suffering but its ultimate goal is the same. They seem to be cruel and harsh but it makes sense.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have to agree with statement of the Food Bank. If there is always someone going to PROVIDE the food for the lessfortunate, then how are the going to rise up from the ashes? When are they going to make a stand for themselves? However i do not disagree with HELPING these people. There could be more done by helping picking the less fortunate up to their feet. Help find them a job. Help them get to a stable environment. Help them as is they were your children. Guide them and get them on their feet. Then let them run!
ReplyDeleteProfessor Hardin made some good points that I agree with, and some others I don't. He started his argument with an analogy, and argument by analogy is a dangerous thing. He compares the earth to a lifeboat. Since there is limited space on a lifeboat, he argues that we cannot let just anybody in to economic prosperity. I do not believe that is a good comparison, mainly because the D&C says there is that the earth is full, there is enough and to spare. But even though his comparison is faulty, many of Hardin's concerns are valid. The USA can't necissarily afford to just pour its resources into less fortunate countries. As Quano said, they need to be taught to be self supporting. To continue Hardin's analogy (albeit crudely), we need to teach the people in the water how to swim.
ReplyDeleteFor the most part I agree about other countries needing to stand on their own feet and take care of their own people without the aid from other places, but at the same time aren't we supposed to help each other in times of need? The Church sends aid to places that have had natural disasters, and we're constantly making and sending humanitarian and hygene kits to places and people that need them...? Where is the line between justice and mercy? God knows perfectly where that line is, but what are we mortals with imperfect vision supposed to do to try and find where exactly that line is?
ReplyDeleteI greatly enjoyed the article "lifeboat ethics." The imagery and wise ideas put forth are some that really encourage thoughtful consideration. I particularly enjoyed discussion on immigration and the world food bank, as a 'commons' Firstly, I strongly agree that not controlling immigration is a way to seek moral symmetry and intellectual logic. If you consider that, by allowing immigrants in uncontrolled, that you are giving away resources and land that would have been available to your children and grandchildren, it immediately becomes obvious that there are future implications on ones self and their posterity, and perhaps immigration isn't so wise. Additionally, just like all common things are abused, a world food bank, unchecked, would be foolish. Lastly, I conclude by saying that I greatly enjoyed this essay, and will continue to let ideas presented in this article ferment in my mind. The end :)
ReplyDeleteThis concept is so true and it reminds me of that famous quote that goes something like, “If you feed a hungry man a fish, he will be survive the day. If you teach him to fish, he will live forever.” I don’t know something like that. But the point is, we can’t let people become reliant on other people's generosity. That is not the way it is supposed to work. It is nice, but it doesn’t teach them anything and as soon as that life source is lost for whatever reason, they are left behind to scramble for survival.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with you. I think charitable organizations are wonderful. Poor countries do need to be self sufficient, but more fortunate countries (like USA) should help them. If they decided to be self sufficient and just cut off all their ties, they wouldn’t get anywhere. Charitable organizations or “lifeboat ethics” are trying to assist these countries and give them a boost to becoming independent and better off. Just because some of these foundations are selfish doesn’t mean all of them are.
ReplyDeleteI find the lifeboat metaphor to be at least a little flawed. Yes, it demonstrates Garrett Hardin's idea perfectly, but is the metaphor really an accurate depiction of the situation out there? In my mind, there's no reason why the rich can't build more boats, or that the rich can't throw out the lifejackets on the boat to the poor that can't swim.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'm not one for giving people a "free ride" through life, it doesn't make since to bash charitable organizations that really do help people in need. Maybe some people will abuse the system, but that doesn't take away our need to help those around us.
These ideas are very controversial. If you are human then you feel sympathy for the people in the water but logically it doesn't make sense to give them a ride. I like Aaron's idea that the rich should build another lifeboat. That is precisely what we should do. Poorer countries need to learn and grow but we can help this process go faster and to avoid mistakes we made as a country as we grew. We can help those less fortunate. I'm sure we can find a way to share the resources that we have on earth so that everyone can prosper.
ReplyDeleteHeck, I love charities. I love it when they can entice people into finding a way to get past their selfish desires and to do a little good for those who truly need it. If the intentions are pure, then charities are a great thing for mankind!
ReplyDeleteThe problem lies in the fact that sometimes we can't "pull people into our lifeboat" without tipping our own boat over and falling in the water ourselves.
I think the rich need to build a freakin' Noah's Ark for the people who want to survive the flood of poverty.
Before I came to college I worked for a place that provided subsidized housing to low income families. The statement that people who always have things given to them never learn to take care of themselves is SO TRUE. Although there were many families who were really trying to get themselves on their own feet, many families had been on the program for fifteen years with no plan to ever leave. It is so frustrating to me that they can rely on other people to take care of them, and not do a thing for themselves. It is a hard choice to make, choosing between helping those who need it, and not helping anyone to avoid those who don't deserve it. It will probably never be resolved.
ReplyDeleteI think Lifeboat Ethics proposed some very interesting ideas. I agreed with some things Hardin said, but others I questioned. I think he was extremely harsh on charities; I find it very difficult to believe that all charities are corrupt. I believe some really do exist solely to help others, not to have profitable gain. I think Sadie made an excellent point when she said that charities not only help those they give to, but they also help those who give. I think in the end, we have to trust in God and believe that he has everything taken care of—maybe we just do not see the bigger picture.
ReplyDeleteLifeboat Ethics covered some very controversial issues. I love doing service and helping others. It always gives me a warm feeling afterward. However, I do not believe we should coddle the poor and helpless. We can not possibly provide for every single person who is down on their luck. We need to implement programs that get people back on their feet give them a push in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteWe need to find ways to share our resources that will benefit the most amount of people.
We were given an assignment in class one time where we were given profiles of people and had to decide which of these people we were going to save and take with us on the lifeboat and we could only save certain amount. It was kind of easy. We chose the pregnat lady, the doctor in case she had the baby on the boat, the dad with kids back home, etc. We let the old man die because he was gonna soon anyways. I don't think it would be as easy in real life, but I just think that we can do what we can do. If we can't bring all the poor peol eonto the boat then at least tak eas many as you can and choose based on need and stuff.
ReplyDelete