Chapter Eight
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________________________________________________
As I move to bring this book to a close, I am reminded of Jesus words to the lawyer who asked “Who is my neighbor?” The Lawyer seemed to want to hold the discussion in a place where more discussion would need to take place. Jesus finished the thought with a direct instruction. “Go and do as the Samaritan has done?” Now is the time to start taking action. Now is always the right time to help someone and action is what is going to take people past the varying perspectives and priorities. So, we have come full circle. Yes, we have to plan before we help. However, we have to help while we plan.
What is help?
Everyone would agree that, to help is to give assistance or be of service. “Can you help me carry this package?” We would also agree that helping would include being of use. “Hey friend, you wash the dishes and I’ll dry them.” Another definition that we might all agree upon would be to improve another person’s condition by making some form of supply available. “I was able to help my elderly mother by hiring a cleaning service to help her keep her apartment clean.”
One doesn’t usually help oneself anymore than we 'baby-sit' our own children. It isn’t considered help if we do it alone, but there are instances when we use the word help when we can’t help ourselves. “I can’t help it – when I am out with my friends, I have to smoke.” “I couldn’t help it. Once they started jumping out of the towers, I couldn’t look away.”
Help is aid. Help is the activity of contributing to the fulfillment of a need or the furtherance of an effort or purpose. “I help my son with his homework. “I was able to assist my blind aunt dress.” “Before the second tower fell, I ran through the streets to see if anyone was in need of aid.”
Help is contribution. “This money will help these children further their education.”
To help is to improve; to change for the better. New tires on that bus would sure help to improve the ride and the overall safety of that vehicle.
Help is a resource. “She was a help to him, providing insight and an extra pair of hands in the assembling of the bicycle.”
To help is to make available, to give access to. “I helped her by making available to her my rolodex and my library.” Now, all she has to do is access it.
Help is serving. “I brought her the food for the first three days. Now she should be strong enough to help herself.”
Let’s take a look at a summary that Moses Maimonides put together as we consider the various levels of giving. He calls giving charity. In that word, there is an implication of selfless giving. There is a flavor of altruism.
The Golden Ladder of Charity
There are eight degrees or steps, says Maimonides, in the duty of charity.
The first and lowest degree is to give---but with reluctance or regret. This is the gift of the hand, but not of the heart.
The second is to give cheerfully but not proportionately to the distress of the sufferer.
The third is to give cheerfully and proportionately, but not until we are solicited.
The fourth is to give cheerfully, proportionately, and even unsolicited; but to put it in the poor man’s hand, thereby exciting in him the painful emotion of shame.
The fifth is to give charity in such a way that the distressed may receive the bounty and know the benefactor, without their being known to him. Such was the conduct of our ancestors, who used to tie up money in the hind-corners of their cloaks, so that the poor might take it unperceived.
The sixth, which rises still higher, is to know the objects of our bounty, but remain unknown to them. Such was the conduct of those of our ancestors who used to convey their charitable gifts to poor people’s dwellings, taking care that their own persons and names should remain unknown.
The seventh is still more meritorious, namely, to bestow charity in such a way that the benefactor may not know the relieved person, nor they the name of their benefactor. This was done by our charitable forefathers during the existence of the Temple. For there was in that holy building a place called the Chamber of Silence or Inostentation: wherein the good deposited secretly whatever their generous hearts suggested; and from which the most respectable poor families were maintained with equal secrecy.
Lastly, the eighth and most meritorious of all, is to anticipate charity by preventing poverty; namely to assist the reduced brother, either by a considerable gift, of a loan of money, or by teaching him a trade, or by putting him in the way of business, so that he may earn an honest livelihood; and not be forced to the dreadful alternative of holding up his hand for charity. And it is to this Scripture alludes when it says, “And if thy brother be waxen poor and fallen in decay with thee, then thou shalt support him: Yea though he be a stranger or a sojourner, that he may live with thee.”
This the highest step and the summit of charity’s Golden Ladder.[1]
Moses Maimonides, a Jewish rabbi and philosopher, lived and wrote during the 12th century.
Let us highlight some of the concepts on this Golden Ladder.
As we discuss this universal topic, we must come to know that we are making choices with every typed word. First, this paper is written in English, from the United States and is taken from the perspective of someone who helps and therefore the terms and the definitions are not as objective as they could be. Moral judgments have already been made. We have determined that helping, for the most part, is good and now we are beginning to consider that helping can be hurtful if it is not carefully considered and thought through. Also, there are those on earth that might not receive this Ladder of Charity as truth or wisdom. I understand that and choose to overlook it as my goal for this study is to form consensus around the terminology so that helpers can control the lasting effects that their charitable efforts have on those they would like to help and hopefully transport from one side of the equation to the other; from receiver of help to giver of help. Also, I want to point out that all eight levels of charity are in fact ‘helping’, giving and are charitable. So, when approaching a group or an individual and make them aware that help is needed, their understanding of ‘help’ may be different than the presenter’s understanding or even the purpose.
In this paradigm, I ask you to notice that from the very beginning ‘pain’ or suffering is mentioned. It is this ‘pain and suffering’ that helping is supposed to alleviate. The pain begins when the needy person experiences lack, suppression or aggression. The helper becomes aware of the situation and then is moved to experience some pain of his own. First, he experiences pain vicariously, and then he moves to eradicate the pain in the other person only to experience what I have termed ‘giver’s remorse’. So, pain at the point of need recognition and then more pain or discomfort after an effort is made to help someone. ‘Giver’s remorse’ has been felt by helpers everywhere. Almost every person at one time or another feels this kind of pain. In most cases it occurs when one is required to give more than what is currently comfortable for them or gives help after experiencing some form of external pressure.
At the very lowest levels on the Ladder of Charity we begin to see why ‘helping’ or ‘giving’ is difficult to perpetuate. Pain on all levels must be managed and overcome. This Golden Ladder of Charity is, in fact, a tool that was designed to warn people about the pain they would confront. It suggests that there is a lot of pain which might better be described as need. It suggests that there is virtue in confronting that need. It even suggests even more strongly that those who are positioned to help should help and in some cases must help to alleviate or even eradicate the pain. (These suggestions or premises are not always accepted by people. If you can’t convince people to move based on these foundational principles, you have to move to another potential group of helpers.) (Level 1) The remorse and the regret are even further exacerbated when giving occurs and the pain the recipient is experiencing continues. As the pain continues, the recipient pushes back and the giver takes it personally. The recipient at this point considers the giver to be incompetent though well intentioned. He assumes that his reluctance and remorse has not gone unnoticed and his grumpy attitude has caused this grumpy response. This may not be the case. It could be. Common sense has told us that ‘What you say or do can be hindered by how you say or do something.’
So, what has happened? We begin our observation with one group of people in need. We approach a second group to ask them to help. We motivate the helpers to give by making them aware of the pain that is being experienced, thereby causing vicarious pain in the group we are trying to motivate to want to give. Our suggestion is that we do what we can to help. We help, but not in proportion to the need and the end result is that we now have two groups in pain rather than one. Pain has increased and we are left with a result that is exactly the opposite of what we intended. And since people in pain tend to look for the cause of the pain to eradicate it, they then confront or attack the instigator of the ‘help’ which, in truth, was no help at all. So, the aroused individual who has been exiled from the first situation learns and has a choice. Either he gets off of the ladder or he climbs the ladder to the second rung. This kind of helping has to be avoided at all costs. This is the very common no plan help strategy that has to stop.
When someone is hurting, it is very comforting to hear a trusted loved one say, “Honey, everything is going to be alright.” Hope filled words that speak of a bright future are always welcome especially when they are spoken with confidence and cheer. Still, if those words are not backed up by truth, the pain will remain and will probably increase because of the delay caused by these empty words. When these words are accompanied by some resource that looks like it will meet the immediate or even the long term need, the cheerful words are well-received but it isn’t long before reality sets back in and the lack that was there before is causing pain and those words of cheer are now mocking and taunting the one in need and tearing up the credibility of the speaker of those words. Again we have good intentions but unacceptable results.
The giver has checked his attitude. He is cheerful. He has come to the aid of the person who is hurting. Isn’t that enough? Obviously, since the pain lingers and seems to be increasing, something else is happening. What is going wrong? What needs to be done? What am I missing? The giver experiences the pain of not having answers to these questions and goes through a series of decisions. Analysis of Costs and Benefits happens, in many cases, in moments. Getting past the adverse reaction coming from the recipient is crucial to helping the person. A proper assessment of what is really needed takes place. So, it wasn’t only my attitude that caused the problem last time, it was that my gift, my supply, my solution and my help was disproportionate. Aha, I have to do better. My help must match the need. If it does not then we will cause more pain once again and our results will be unsatisfactory.
Keep in mind, that the giver is experiencing great pain at this point. At level one he gave reluctantly and disproportionately. The recipient wasn’t helped in spite of his efforts. The pain was not alleviated and seemed to actually increase. He concludes that he has a bad attitude, so he cheers himself up. He reads a book on how to stay positive, possibly something Napolean Hill wrote. He comes back only to find himself rebuffed again. It is at this point that a real confrontation takes place. What more does this situation require of us? Again, the planning was insufficient. Most of the movement towards helping was motivated by the helper’s need to alleviate his own pain that he assumed would be caused by inaction. Again, planning should avoid this step. We have to start on the third rung of this ladder if we are to make consistent progress and be efficient in our helping.
We are faced with a choice. Are we going to jump off the ladder or climb to the next rung?
Serious progress has been made between rungs two and three on the Golden Ladder. The giver has taken control of his attitudes, his prejudices and his personal needs long enough to assess what is needed and how best to supply and deliver the help. He has moved past his initial attitudinal problems. He has now begun to take very serious the matter on hand, but not seriously enough to move without some kind of provocation coming from a third party. He is looking for allies. He wants to be asked by the right person and when he is asked he will then move his supply with a good attitude, but waiting to be asked means that he needs to garner a greater perceived reward from the one asking. He may be able to call on a favor from the asker in the future. He is making assessments and at this point pain will be avoided for the initial needy person, but a further transaction is taking place where pain may be experienced and that is between the asker and the giver. Successful negotiation at this point will keep all three parties in the system and possibly begin to get the receiver to begin to climb the ladder while the asker gets the person on rung #3 to climb to rung #4. Still, for the first time suffering is being recognized, measured and alleviated. We are making major progress and most helping situations are like this one. Since most people have busy lives and their concerns are for the people that they are immediately responsible to and for, they will continue to have to be asked to help and shown where, when and how to help. So, the proportionate part of the calculations will continually be made by those free enough to see the rest of the rungs of this ladder and have the passion and the courage to continue to climb the ladder.
Climbing from rung #1 to rung #4 is accomplished after many calculations. The one who needs help is assessed. The amount of help needed is assessed. The delivery of that help, in order for it be received has to be assessed and how much is needed has been assessed. With all of this in mind, it is pretty amazing that people get helped as often as they do.
The giver is learning. He is doing what he thinks is correct. He has mastered cheerful, proportionate and unsolicited. He has paid attention to the needy person inquiring and has met the need. However, a whole new dynamic sets in. Perhaps because the giver is now experiencing no pain and the ease by which he gives causes in the receiver a need to reciprocate and the receiver has nothing to give back. The giver feels pretty good about being able to help someone ‘less fortunate’ than he is. This causes problems as the receiver picks up on a form of condescension. The giver capable of giving to the needy person begins to do so with pity rather than empathy.
All of the good intentions have alleviated one kind of pain only to replace it with another kind of pain that must now be dealt with in a different way. This new pain is called embarrassment and shame. This pain puts into motion a new balancing act. The giver recognizes that he has caused pain and sees that avoidance is beginning to take place rather than gratitude and increased relationship. The receiver doesn’t want to be around the giver and makes great efforts to avoid any future contact. They want the stuff or the solution, but they do not want the giver of the solution. In many cases, animosity builds up and this pain is so great that, in many cases, people would rather go hungry than take charity.
Cuddy’s work speaks of this. Jackman in her work on how women are viewed in the work place speaks to this level of help. That patronizing, condescending helping leaves people in a place where they can’t help but try to measure up and the pain involved here can cause a major rift between the two groups. Giving supply and aid is not enough. Esteem, respect, personal responsibility and more is required after the basics are provided and it takes selflessness to do that. As Altruism is required, many times, confrontation and conflict take place.
As the giver overcomes his confusion and disgust, he overrides his feelings of anger towards the receiver. He can’t help but ask, “Why can’t they just be grateful? What else must I do?” That second question leads them up to the fifth rung on the Golden Ladder. It is also here, when the giver becomes aware of givers that move on rungs higher than he does and they begin to look up to more developed givers, rather than looking only to the receiver for instructions. With that revelation the giver climbs the ladder to level 5.
The receiver has asked for generosity, cheerfulness, proportionality and now has asked for no reciprocity requirement. He doesn’t want the giver to ask for anything, not even gratitude. The giver is required to grow in his capacity toward selflessness as he continues to listen to the requirements of the needy and solve problems from the perspective of the one in need. At first, the giver was tempted to discontinue his giving as the receiver kept making more and more demands, but with some thought the giver began to realize that he was experiencing some serious benefit from this process. The giver was now consistently generous, cheerful, effective (proportionate), self-starting and now, working towards being self-sufficient – not requiring gratitude from the receiver and not even requiring interaction. Not only does this level avoid pain for the giver, it produces pleasure.
Still, the receiver is aware of who the giver is and when confronted has to deal with the knowledge of that inequality – still a semblance of guilt and shame, but this time it is without the perceived – real or unreal – condescension coming from the giver. Still, the giver gets the benefit of recognition. He knows that they know who gave the gift, so even though they don’t know who gave it, they know that they have somehow received some credit for it. In the community the givers receive recognition from those who are aware of the giving and the continued chasm occurs between giver and receiver. The good will and equality that should have been developed has not yet happened. The giver is aware of this and knows that there are further rungs on the ladder to climb. The giver has graduated past selfishness and wants to see the recipient paying his benefits forward or out to others, so he continues to think of ways to become anonymous so the desire to reciprocate benefits others in need rather than the giver.
Having experienced further development they experiment with anonymous giving in a strategic way. They didn’t quite learn as much as they would have liked to on Level 5 so they flip the anonymity in this charitable transaction. Needs are being met, generously, cheerfully, proportionately and shame and guilt are being dealt with. However, the shame and the guilt are still there, but the persons feeling the shame or the guilt don’t know where to focus their animosity. They are upset, but they don’t know who to be angry with. Still, the givers get to witness this and they realize that there are other levels that must be attained to achieve what they wish to, and that is – removing the pain from the object of their generosity. After all, you wouldn’t pinch a baby while you were feeding it. You feed the baby to meet that baby’s needs and in some cases to keep them from crying.
As every rung has alleviated pain in one way or another, they realize that there are more ways to remove the initial need, the shame and the guilt that comes from obligatory reciprocation. They have also realized that they, the givers, have moved from the negative feelings of remorse and a need for other types of self-gratification to a place far more fulfilling and rewarding. They start to realize they want to give the needy their chance to begin climbing the ladder for themselves. Prior to this, they didn’t know they were carrying within themselves a sense of entitlement. They were unaware of the fact that they were creating a two-tier system that wasn’t allowing the receiver the opportunity to change his position. However, having traveled up through this learning process and recognizing people higher up on the ladder and their willingness to help them to come higher, they recognize that it is their responsibility as well to assist those that have been receiving help the opportunity to begin the journey up the ladder. Up until now, the giver has determined the proportionality. There has been no trust paid to the receiver. But level 7 allows for that. We have finally found a way to move from exclusion to inclusion and on to trust. We are getting there.
The giver gives what he wants to give. His satisfaction and his self worth is determined by his levels of generosity, self initiative and cheerfulness. He receives no recognition from other givers or from the recipients. He makes no assessments as to the specific needs of the recipients and makes no determinations concerning what is enough or what is needed. He trusts that this system will work. He actually trusts the integrity of the receiver. This is a major breakthrough. This is giving to a person who is your equal no matter what they have or what they are willing to do or are capable of doing. Judgment of others is taken out of the equation and only a self-examination takes place.
When a person leaves a tip for service rendered, they usually think about how well the duties were performed. They think about the server’s promptness, their politeness and the attentiveness overall. The amount of the tip is dependent on someone else’s performance and the tip-giver determines the amount, but not so in the Chamber of Silence or as Maimonides calls it the Chamber of Inostentation.
It is at this level that the table is turned. The gratuity is not given based on performance. The gratuity is given based on the integrity and the value that the giver places on oneself. The more I can give, the more I should give. My value and my development are internal. I don’t have the lingering pain that occurs when I need the approval or recognition that comes from others. Giving is the giver’s measuring stick.
As the giver makes his way through the community, he/she begins to notice that people who were once recipients only have enough to begin to meet the needs of those in their surroundings. No longer do only a few people find themselves in a position of awareness and action. Even the receivers are moving towards generosity and some are even becoming cheerful about it as they know that there is a place where there is an endless supply.
It is at this point that true gratification sets in and the giver begins to see the true wisdom in this Golden Ladder. Existing needs are not enough for him. Now he wants to take on next year’s needs and the needs of future generations. He sees the benefits and he climbs to the next and last rung of the Golden Ladder.
The giver begins to anticipate pain. He begins the education process for people. He begins to calculate the population cycles and begins to plan crops for future generations. He builds hospitals with systems that include all people. He develops programs to help people become aware of the chambers of inostentation. He works to insure that all people have what they need as he has experienced all of the benefits of climbing this ladder. He has learned that choosing to meet the needs of others until the pain actually goes away is truly rewarding and puts you in a class of thinkers and doers that live to solve problems, perform and produce. It is a world of pure joy and therein lies the final question – How do we create a system where all people can achieve and learn what we have learned and now enjoy? How can we motivate people to this place without the pain? Indeed, it was the pain itself that caused us to begin this journey in the first place. I guess we’ll worry about that when we get there. In the meantime, “Hey look, there’s some more pain.” “Hey, do you see that? That looks like a finite resource. What will we do when that resource is gone?” “Hey, there’s an oppressed person or people. We should help them.”
There is a lot more to helping than might first be considered. Helping hurts and help may not even truly be help until the pain or the suffering is alleviated. Thinking these concepts through aids people to coordinate their efforts and avoid miscommunication along many lines. It also helps people to locate where they are on the ladder, knowing that on any given day they can move from Level 1 to Level 8 depending on one’s attitude or perspective. Having an awareness of the Golden Ladder helps a person to locate themselves to prepare themselves for the results of their efforts. Framing every painful situation helps the participant to see things that they might not see prior to viewing these 8 levels.
Another conclusion, I draw personally from this section is that when you try to form groups to help in situations that require more than one giver, help needs to be defined. Otherwise, there will be confusion and unmet expectations. So this paradigm is absolutely essential. As I have mentioned earlier, it is very difficult to see the wisdom in the Golden Ladder of Charity until you have attempted to help people from different cultures and at different levels of need. Until you have sacrificially helped someone and made every effort to see that person made whole, only to watch them jump right back into a life of drugs, go back to their pimp or turn on you with outright anger and hate, you will have difficulty understanding the wisdom of allowing people access to resources anonymously. Helping people who help people to find rewards without having to extract them from the recipient or through public praise is of the utmost importance if we are to perpetuate prosocial behavior and ease a larger percentage of the world’s need.
In Summary, we have a few universal conclusions that we can put in our tool kit. We know some things for sure.
We must plan before we help.
Historical, cultural, social, economic and situational information must be gathered from a distance, taking into account the ingroup identities that will be challenged when you introduce your team of helpers. How strong are those ties and what costs will be involved when you start moving in. (e.g. we might think it wise to bring food to hungry people and deliver it for free, but if it puts the farmers and the agricultural infrastructure out of business, then you have done long term damage. People won’t buy next year what they got for free this year. It must also be understood that there are informal social networks in many places. In Fraser, there are the gangs and the drug traffickers. They are not just thugs. They are brothers, fathers, mothers, mentors, friends and bread winners. Choosing a new group over someone who would die for them, is not the easy choice we might think it is.) Pralahad suggested that we stop sympathizing with the 4 billion people that live on $2 or less a day. He suggested that they can be clients and business partners. He elevated those people with one suggestion from a group to be pitied to a group to consider as equals. This kind of perspective change is what is required of leaders in Social Psychology.
Identify leaders, representatives or spokespersons from the community and approach them to include them in the planning stages. Getting these people to agree on the mission and the vision of the plan is essential. They will first speak the needs of the people you are trying to reach and then, if you can convince them by using the principles of Intergroup Contact Theory and Social Identity Theory that the end result of the plan is better than what they currently have and that they will have ownership on the other end, you will have created your salesman for the project. This is the Law of the Few that Malcolm Gladwell talks about in the Tipping Point. In Fraser, John Edmonds who has been there 10 years, a successful community development leader, has been working this turf. He has brought the leader of ‘the Bloods’ onto the team. When John walks the neighborhood with his home builders, his road pavers and architectural design team, he is accompanied by the gang leader, key clergy and other long time community leaders. These people act as the endorsers of the plan. However, this does not work if the leaders are not convinced that they will share equally in the new order once it is put in place. Huge pressure will come down if the right leaders are not selected.
Educate your team of volunteers and survey them throughout the process. Ample resources and tools need to be in place so that the helpers can focus on the helping rather than their own survival or basic needs. Also, how they feel about the recipients is important to the process. A trained ear will pick up stereotypical comments of admiration, envy, pity and disgust. These emotions will clue the leaders as to where corresponding behaviors might kick in, namely, passive or active facilitation or passive or active harm. From the start, using things we learned from Weiner’s Attribute Theory, leaders must convince the volunteers that for the most part, the circumstances that have brought about these inequities are beyond the control of the recipients of the help. No matter how much reciprocation or equity is achieved there will always be those that believe in a just world and people need to be given information that helps them to see these people as deserving of the help.
Trust that people will act prosocially. People from all areas of thought and training want to be part of the solution. Helping people to focus on the real issues and stay away from competing worldviews and ideologies will be essential to true efficiency and to meeting the needs of those that are suffering the most. People are suffering, it seems to me, not because there isn’t enough supply, but because people would rather argue about how we should help and who should get to do the helping. I chose a Judeo/Christian perspective as my main perspective to bring these tools to teams made up of people who gather at churches for a reason. These people are always being rallied to help and there are groups that are constantly calling them hypocrites. Part of the reason for that is because we/they keep helping from the lower rungs of the Ladder of Charity and without a knowledge of what has been studied out by social psychologists. Personally, I spent months trying to come to terms with the vocabulary of the academic world, before I could begin to work on bringing a tool kit to the teams of helpers that assemble each weekend only to deliver disproportionate help.
Once the helping kicks in begin to look for a tendency to reciprocate and reward that behavior. The reciprocation should look more like paying it forward. When people share their supply and communicate well with the source of the supply this should go well. The more we can do this according to the Golden Ladder of Charity, striving for anonymity and controlling for guilt and shame, the more successful we will be. Taking into account the goals of the newly formed group – the helpers combined with the recipients – and the group that is going to be required to perpetuate the changes that have been made, we will have a better idea as to the predictability of the outcome.
People will always try to cheat the system and take advantage of those who help. Moreover, there will always be people who want to stand on the sidelines criticizing people who are really trying to help others. These are the two areas where leaders have to focus as we look to reward and help the helpers and help those who hurt until they in turn can become helpers.
Having read Allport, Dovidio, Wiener, Jackman, Pettigrew, Duckitt, Cuddy, Glick, Altenmeyer and others, I feel that I have a much more balanced perspective. I am thankful for their work and for my participation in that work.
Let me close with a quote from Gordon Allport.
“It required years of labor and billions of dollars to gain the secret of the atom. It will take a still greater investment to gain the secrets of man’s irrational nature.” Gordon Allport on the back cover. (The Nature of Prejudice, 1954)
[1] From a Treasury of Jewish Folklore by Nathan Ausubel, copyright 1984, 1976 by Crown Publishers, Inc.]