The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Edmund Burke
I think that in modern times, in "western" culture we have taking a firm position on not getting involved. We don't get involved in our neighbours' business. We don't get involved when we see someone doing something questionable, and more often than not stand there and watch a crime being committed rather than even calling the authorities. "None of my business" has become a catch phrase that tries to absolve otherwise good people from "interfering" in some situation. Now, we are all also aware of the phrase, "let no good deed go unpunished" which is the root of the "none of my business" and basically means that if you stick your nose in somewhere, even for the right reasons, you might be the one on the hook for something that otherwise you could just have walked past. Unfortunately this has taken good people and made them apathetic. The Christian Bible states in Revelations 3:16 to be hot or cold, but not lukewarm. This passage is encouraging people to take a stand - believe, or don't believe, but don't be wishy-washy. There is also the NIMBY principle (not in my back yard) where we think an idea (like a half-way house) is a great idea, just not in MY neighbourhood, where we can agree with the sentiment (half-way houses are good, and necessary), but find reasons not to be a part of the solution, i.e. just don't build one near my home. SO, 1) we have people saying they don't want to get involved, 2) We have people who won't take a stand on things one way or another (usually for fear of offending someone), and 3) we have people who do agree that something needs to be done, they just feel that other people should do it, and not themselves. Add to this, that when we see/hear of people we know taking a firm stand on something, we immediately rush in to judge them - "OMG I cannot believe they voted for X!" (for example_ Not wanting to be judged, we back away from them because we don't want to be involved, we don't want to take a stand with or against them, or we feel that THEY can take on the issue while we remain morally neutral (at least in public.)
I had a great conversation with good friends (similar to yours) where I said that if we took the same amount of money spent on major sporting events (even only just championship games) that things like child poverty could be wiped out. Everyone watching the sporting event would say there is nothing that they can do about child poverty, everyone would agree child poverty is bad, everyone would also hope that someone else would do something about it, and then they would go back to watching the game.
What they don't realize is that solving big, world-wide problems, isn't about one person, or a small group taking on the challenge, it's about a world-wide mind-set change. On some small levels there are changes: micro-loans for developing countries where people can get $100 to buy a sewing machine, to make clothes to sell and earn a living; crowd-funding where it isn't one large donation that makes an event happen, but hundreds or small donations. Things like this show that there are changes in attitudes where people are actually able to see how their small donation (in this case of money) makes a difference, but we have a long way to go before we see an end to wars, poverty, oppression, and hatred.
The short answer to your question, is doing nothing the same as doing harm, is that when good people see a situation that could be resolved and act, through giving of their time, money, and talent to solving the issue, and when they would work with other people who have the same goals, that being a resolution to the problem, in a loving and dialogical way, anything can happen. I think any
good person who ask themselves if their inability, or indecision, or absolution of responsibility in getting involved makes them a bad person who is contributing to the problem has already taken the first, and biggest step - acknowledging that they need to be involved.
Do good people do harm because of their inaction/involvement? The answer, unequivocally has to be, yes.
Old Ark the Preacher
mrm3ntalist wrote:We were discussing some matter ( refugees, economical crisis etc ) with some friends over - a lot of - wine and lamp chops and the discussion turned very philosophical. The question was what each one of us can do. One said
"If you can do good do it, but do no harm"
and most of us agreed on it. One though said
"(do-me) you. If you can do good, you must do good. Otherwise you are letting the problem get worse"
So I am asking Arkanis (
), is doing nothing for a problem around us, actually the same as doing harm?
I'm still looking...