"Don't be offended if I give you some money"

The world as we know (and at least, as we read on papers and screens), is the world lack of compassions, exceedingly greedy, where everything is calculated, valued and monetized with price tags. The habit of calculating everything, widely discussed in an intriguing way in Freakonomics by Stephen Levitt (2005) for instance, seems to be the most common and acceptable human ways of deciding any actions and decisions. The main idea is that incentives is the root of all human actions.

This is where I find it difficult to match some 'uncommon' acts of mercy and compassions. What if people do something good simply because they think it is good to do? Not because of the incentives from superior, peers, nor because of any financial incentives? I don't suggest that people who do this have been extinct, but in our contemporary politics at least, this idea is way too hard to perceive. It is almost impractical. Many researches were conducted to find out whether a regent really did all good policies because he/she simply wanted the best for his/her citizens, or because she/he was moved by political and economical incentives?

I suddenly recall a small debates we've had in our small office few years ago. While we analyzed why a particular regent issued a pro-poor policy that did not seem to give him a significant political reward, a colleague inquired us to find what is the incentives he might have gained through that, or what was the driving force/motive of his action. Other colleague stated that it's because the regent is widely known as a kind person. As simple as that. Way too simple it looked odd. The other colleague contended that it is (nearly) impossible for one to do such things without a beneficial incentives in my mind, be it financial or political. Two people with two different way in approaching and examining a good action. That debate I found substantially important as a reflection and an interesting topic to explore human beings' diversity in general.

It is common to find that when someone is being kind to others, the kindness is often abused, because kindness, true and sincere one, is of the rare commodity. It is easy to exploit, since the doer mostly does not realize that he/she is a rare creature, a sheep in the wolves' world. Or else, it is hard to perceive, therefore it is always being seen cynically as a 'no such thing as free lunch' approach. What if the free lunch is truly for free? Chances are, if the doer did this, he/she thought that it is a normal way to do things. But most people will find it odd, and do an action that 'normal' people would do: grateful in a calculated manner: giving money, giving a price tag to the kindness action. In normal language, it is a symbol of grateful. However, in the doer's perception, that is not necessary at all,since she/he did that for his/her own pleasure, for the joy of giving, of doing good and right things.

That is when you did something you think is just normal, and people who you did good thought of replying your kindness financially. Knowing that you are not the type of person who thinks of it in a financial and incentives-motive way, people who you did good usually inform it to you politely: "Don't be offended if I give you some money". What will you do next?

caption: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Freakonomics.jpg