Charity and Utility Functions
Posted on March 5th, 2007 by Kevin Burtt (The Baron)
From Alma 29:
“O that I were an angel, and could have the wish of mine heart, that I might go forth and speak with the trump of God, with a voice to shake the earth, and cry repentance unto every people! Yea, I would declare unto every soul, as with the voice of thunder, repentance and the plan of redemption, that they should repent and come unto our God, that there might not be more sorrow upon all the face of the earth. But behold, I am a man, and do sin in my wish…” (Alma 29:1-3)
Alma wishes to cry repentance to the world–seems like an okay desire, what’s the ’sin’ here? Is Alma just being humble and self-effacing here, or is there a larger principle at play, perhaps?
Continuing on:
“…for I ought to be content with the things which the Lord hath allotted unto me…. [W]hy should I desire more than to perform the work to which I have been called? Why should I desire that I were an angel, that I could speak unto all the ends of the earth? For behold, the Lord doth grant unto all nations…in wisdom, all that he seeth fit that they should have; therefore we see that the Lord doth counsel in wisdom, according to that which is just and true.” (Alma 29:3,6-8)
There are a multitude of problems facing the world today in all corners of the globe–many of them very serious: Mass genocide in Darfur, Over 10,000 women (many under the age of 16) forced to work as prostitutes just in Calcutta (India) alone, an average of four children per day dying in the US due to abuse or neglect.
Each story is individually tragic, but added together–along with 100+ other stories and statistics we could come up with in just a few seconds of googling–paints a picture of mass suffering that covers every city of every country around the world.
As a human–let alone a disciple of Christ–we are naturally moved to care about those in tragic circumstances. When looking for outlets of our charity, it’s natural to start with the most serious problems first, and then work your way down. ‘Seriousness’ is not the only factor to consider in applying charity, however…nor is it arguably even the most important.
Consider a utility function f(x), which defines the effectiveness of any personal effort towards resolving problem ‘x’–and this is the important part–per unit of time/money/energy expended. Basically, this abstract function considers not only how serious is the problem, but also what solutions are available to me, personally, and how effective will those personal efforts be towards actually solving or reducing the problem?
I have a basic understanding of the situation in Darfur…what I don’t have is a solution. What specifically can I do to stop genocide in Sudan, or any African country? Grab my gun, hop on a plane to Sudan, and take active part in saving refugees? (I don’t even own a gun…) Methinks this would not actually help…not to mention lead to a quick death (utility = 0).
Contribute money? Who would I contribute to, and how would any amount of money be used to actually stop the genocide? Are their organizations that have the ability to put a stop to the killing, but are not doing so now only because of lack of funds?
Here’s the problem–and I think this is what the above section in Alma is trying to imply: Many world problems–while serious–are far enough beyond the scope of my influence that most efforts spent on them have a near-zero utility. I could quit my job and spend my time organizing ‘awareness’ activities and writing letters to congressmen, although I suspect the actual impact on the problem will be very minimal. (Here’s a sample website about Darfur–judge for yourself what the true utility is for any of the ’solution’ bullet-points listed at the bottom)
What are the consequences of spending great time and effort on low-to-zero utility causes? Put simply, higher utility causes a little closer to home might be neglected. When we give the daughter of an inactive family in our ward a ride to church every week, or I mow the lawn of a single mom during the summer, these are hardly ‘crises’ on par with Indian prostitution, but the utility from my perspective is much higher. My presence and effort makes a real and tangible difference in the ‘problem’. Would the utility really be greater if I was spending my days outside the nation’s capitol in hunger strikes? Who would be a father to my two sons, if I was constantly somewhere else trying to be a ‘father’ to boys on other continents? Perhaps, the ’sin’ as referenced by Alma is not simply wishing to do more, it is failing to take care of responsibilities close at hand because your desire and effort to do more has ironically made you do less because of actions with near-zero utility. (Compare, perhaps, to those ‘armchair prophets’ who have great ideas about how to ‘fix’ the Church from the top-down, but have trouble getting their home teaching done every month…)
There’s a story that goes:
A boss of a company called one of his employees–a man who had been a ‘problem’ employee in many ways–into his office for a personal meeting. Asking the employee to sit down, the boss chose his tact and began to speak:
“I’ve called you here, because I have a special job for you. An important job that requires someone intelligent, hard-working, and resourceful to complete. I’ve decided that I want you to do it.”
Feeling unexpectedly flattered, the employee smiled and replied, “Well, I’m certainly the right guy for the job. What’s this job you want me to do?”
The boss immediately pointed at the employee and said, firmly, “YOURS!”
I believe Alma’s point is that it is often hard, yet necessary, to NOT look at the big picture, but instead see that there will ALWAYS be necessary and useful targets of charity within our own ward or neighborhood which deserve our direct attention, despite usually not being ’significant’ enough to make the national news. Being “content with the things the Lord has allotted to us” may mean more than just ‘count your blessings’, but also not neglecting the things we have stewardship over because we’re worrying about things that we do not. Not spending our effort on low utility crises when higher utility needs go unmet.
I admit: I did not do anything today to save the people of Darfur. I probably won’t tomorrow, either. Whether that makes me apathetic or pragmatic depends on your point of view…
» Filed Under Any
Comments
4 Responses to “Charity and Utility Functions”
Leave a Reply
A friend once made the comment to me that she felt one of the best things she could do for the world is raise good kids. I agree.
I wonder, though, if perhaps we could all pray, if we make it a matter of prayer specifically for the people of Darfur?
How about praying for the 40 percent of U.K. Muslims who prefer Sharia Law to U.K. Law? Isn’t Free Agency a gift from the Lord? Sharia Law is the antithesis of Free Agency.
Bot, what do a bunch of Muslims living (and eating high on the hog) in England have to do with starving children in the Sudan? Are they ones who prefer Sharia Law?
Dag Hammarskjöld, former Secretary General of the UN said something to the effect of:
“It is more noble to labor for the one, than labor diligently for the masses.”
Seems rather fitting for this post.