True selfless connectedness, or what?

[Mairead]

Tensions are brewing in the family of Zell Kravinsky, 48, and his psychiatrist-wife, Emily, over what she believes is his excessive altruism, according to an August profile in The New York Times. Kravinsky is not just a passionate philanthropist (from his fortune in commercial real estate), but such a strict utilitarian that he says he would sacrifice his one good kidney (he's already donated the other one) if it were needed by someone doing more social good than he. "No one should have two kidneys," he says, "until everyone has one." He said he cannot value his own kids more than anyone else's, a point that has angered his parents and caused Emily to threaten divorce and two friends to abandon him. {New York Times, 8-17-03}

[camero]

1. That's going a bit far.

It's one thing to give away all your worldly possessions but quite another to give up your bodily organs.

And I once threw myself in front of a car to keep someone from getting hit. But I can't agree with him giving up his last kidney.

[gottaB]

2. Why not?

If it really comes to donating his last kidney, I say maybe he's got a screw loose--but that's still no skin off my nose. He's living according to his ideals and that's admirable.

[camero]

3. I agree with your sentiment

But giving up your last kidney is basically suicide. His first kidney? I have no problem with that. Plus he still has a responsibility to his own children. That means staying alive while he can.

My situation didn't really require any thought, just that there was a danger and I should take care of it.

[camero]

6. sorry another point

The key phrase is someone who would do more social good than he and that is not really altruistic. What if it was a welfare mom? Real altruism doesn't differentiate.

[gottaB]

9. Moms do a lot of social good, but anyway

The counter argument of course is that no altruism is real unless you can put it into practice. His altruism is informed by a social conscience and some beliefs which may be debated, but the realness of it is striking.

[camero]

10. I disagree

His version of Altruism is social engineering. He would only do it for someone who is the next Einstein or other. If it was really altrusitic, it would be for the last person on the transplant list.

You make a good point, but not good enough.

[JanMichael]

4. You know whenever a member of the Proffesional or Mini-Capitalist class...

...turns truly Altruistic or even Socialistic the first thing the "Media" and that person's contemporaries claim is insanity. Then they strip them of their "wealth" and usually stick in an asylum.

It's been done so many times that it's a "norm".

I wish this "nut" the best.

[Clete]

5. He can give his last kidney away after he dies

but for god's sake not before! It would be humble of him to admit that he's not superman and leave some philanthropy to others so they too can make their contribution for the greater good.

[camero]

7. That I agree with.

After death, but don't create your own death. That's not his call.

[Nikia]

8. My mom was not amused by her mother's altruism

My grandfather was a middle class professional who saved about half of his income while his family lived fairly poor. My grandmother was a real altruist though. She wouldn't buy her own children nice clothes because her husband would find out that she was wasting her money. She bought nice clothes for truly poor children instead. My mother resented this.