-
Isn’t that exactly the problem?
Of course we feel more affected by something we have proximity and experience with. But we also have the capability for unpacking our thoughts and seeing a wider picture and just possibly, before uploading another screenshot with a broken heart emoji, even recognising that it’s kind of weird we feel worse about the part destruction of one building, than the bombing and utter destruction of an entire city.
Over 50 go fund me campaigns started by regular people and the total official fund raising is at over £600 million euro’s. For a building that caught fire less than 24 hours ago. Lol.
1 Attachment
-
Fyoosh
-
I feel that the only way to meet this requirement is to be a Tralfamadorian and experience everything in all times simultaneously.
-
Of course we feel more affected by something we have proximity and experience with. But we also have the capability for unpacking our thoughts
I think you are right to wish we would all have more empathy for those living through real disasters, e.g Mosul. I think it's wrong to suggest we shouldn't express grief / shock at disasters on our doorstep, as if that somehow makes us callous.
If someone dies in my street, of course I'll care more about that than a hundred people dying the other side of the world. It doesn't mean I have a blinkered world view.
h2o
William.
I don’t think it’s immoral to feel more affected by something you have direct experience of. Mosul’s destruction was tragic but i didn’t call out my Iraqi Kurdish friend for feeling worse about that than the destruction of the Bamiyan buddhas.