The Good Samaritan.
A stranger who helps someone they don’t know – in fact, someone they might usually shun by mere association.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Good_Samaritan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
Truth is, I was going to review the iPad this week but then this story caught my eye:
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/posted/archive/2010/04/27/428895.aspx
It is a simple story. A homeless man intervenes in a fight. Gets stabbed. Lies on a well-travelled street, bleeding to death, while people walk by ignoring him. Gets phone tagged by one mobile voyeur. All while high-tech video surveillance cameras record the sad ordeal. Finally, one person calls 911 Emergency Services – too late; he dies.
So in our world of social networking; always on; oversharing; never off the grid; in contact; 24/7 – you get the picture – we let a man die by almost purposeful neglect.
The question is are we losing our humanity because we have become so cyber? And if we are, what about the younger generation behind us whose only frame of reference is “Cloud Relationships”?
The question is on the minds of many:
And should be on our minds as well – as the impact affects all human interactions.
Listen:
“Technology is a way of organizing the universe so that man doesn’t have to experience it.” Max Frisch
We have all seen the movies and read the books and listened to the prophets of doom – I’d posit that a bleeding man lying unaided and dying on the street while his photo flashes through the mobile ether is way scarier and closer to home.
What do you think?
And one last thought – cynical as it may be:
“For a list of all the ways technology has failed to improve the quality of life, please press three.” Alice Kahn
And if you press 1, 2 or 4 – be prepared….
Inspired by JR.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
I like the biblical reference, reminds me that we’ve been ignoring lepers and outcasts for a long, long time.
I don’t know that this homeless man would have had any greater chance of surviving in pre-cyber times. The only difference here is that technology exposed his plight and our callousness to poverty and suffering. Would he have suffered the same fate in 21st century Mayberry? Probably not. But when poverty becomes part of the landscape of urban life–people sleeping on the streets; public intoxication, drug addition, psychosis–we decide that we can’t possibly intervene and still maintain normal lives. And when you add to the mix the potential downsides of getting involved–lawsuits, blood (and worse) on our clothes (and worse), scams by people only pretending to be helpless–the callous grows even tougher. I wish I could offer a solution, but I, too, have a normal life to get back to. I just think that raising technology as a cause for all this will lead us to solutions that aren’t.
A sad reflection of one of the darker corners of the human condition: the notion that distancing from reality can keep us less accountable for it.
On a semi-related note: robotics engineers at Georgia Tech are attempting to write code to help military drones make more ethical decisions on the battlefield. “Progress,” we’re hoping, that will ultimately create artificial intelligence advisors for solidiers that “…would give clear ethical suggestions in situations when humans might be distracted by emotions.”
Distracted by emotions.
This is a terrible thing to see. Maybe social networking and digital connections have made us a colder society. But it’s all up to the individual to make the right choice when presented with moral challenges.
On a positive note, I have seen social networking enable Good Samaritans. Every weekend for the past two years, I’ve donated my time to the Coalition For the Homeless here in New York. I drive a mobile soup kitchen on Sunday nights that serves over 1,000 homeless and hungry New Yorkers. As I meet other volunteers through this program, we stay in touch through Facebook. We utilize it to organize fundraisers, food and clothing drives and to engage in meaningful dialogues about the growing homeless problem in New York.
So, again, it really is up to the individual to make the right decision to help their fellow man. Face to face or digitally.
Could not agree more — we all have free choice — its up to us to do the right thing — high tech or low tech — in fact this is waht was once called high touch — I see it as the highest state
Devin,
(First off, don’t view this reply as an attack at you personally, its intent is merely just to start a discussion)
You essentially bring up two points as to why people would be hesitant to help in this situation:
- the commonality of homelessness, which would prevent us from maintaining our lifestyle if we did intervene
my response: If every person chose to help in minor way we could certainly maintain our “normal” lifestyle. The fact of the matter; we live in a world where too many people believe that a small effort makes no difference. Just look at our voter turnout, sad. We need to stop the spread of this belief.
- the risk we put ourselves under by choosing to help the man
my response: Let’s take the worst case scenario, you help this man, get his blood on an open wound and he has aids. End result: you die. I live in fear of dying one day for no good reason, not of dying trying to save another person’s life. Don’t get me wrong, I want to live a full life, but I see no greater way to leave this life.
This “modern life” we live brings a fake sensation of being safe and far away from dangerous situations. We became so distant that we cannot see outcasts as humans!!
I am shocked with this notice! But while I was reading, it instantly remind me walking in the streets in São Paulo totally conflicted with myself wishing help and fearing the poor ones at the same time.
Well in situations like this I ask myself a simple question what or how would the greatest man who ever lived handle this. We should follow what he taught because he was made like his father.
In his writings he uses the conditions of the world to teach and how to model being a better person. But then say‘s I am no part of this world Why? Well he lived in the world but everything he used was for his father’s purpose. So today if we use the world’s technology to benefit his father’s purpose and show humility where possible how can it go wrong? If we use technology for the purpose of deceiving or hurting your neighbors then to me this is opposite of his teachings because he said love your neighbor and that time that was everyone.
Danger has become a random factor in life — everyone in NY is thinking about the fizzled car bomb…
Another thing is the greatest man lived in heaven, he emptied himself, took up human life, and ‘became poor for our sakes so we all may die and maybe it’s unforeseen but the greatest thing is to have a clear conscience with no regrets and recognize our obligation
“Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end, an end which it was already but too easy to arrive at; as railroads lead to Boston or New York. We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate.” — Thoreau, “Walden”
This is indeed a sad story but I would like to point out two things.
The first is that although becoming more cyber can be responsible for losing our humanity it is only one of any number of reasons. We live in cities where people barely greet each other anymore, film and computer games have dulled our emotions to violence. There has been a shift in values, and I am guilty. I watch the movies, play the games, live in a city and avoid making eye contact when in transit.
The second is that through us becoming more cyber we are able to empathize with this sad event online and share our views. This story can transcend traditional media and reached across the internet. The mere fact that the story of the Good Samaritan found its way here, and that so many people have responded indicates that humanity can exist in cyberspace.
“Be the change you want to see in the world.” Mahatma Gandhi
The dichotomy of the Digital Age — more global/more local — more involved/more detached