Letters

Monday, October 26, 1998

Letters

Columnist states false premises about altruism

Matthew Gever in his Oct. 22 article ("Aiding others does more
harm than good") states that altruism benefits no one and usually
does more damage than it ever hopes to solve. He relies heavily on
his assessment of Mother Teresa’s career to reach his conclusions.
Mother Teresa focused on helping the seriously ill in Calcutta,
India. Since there still is great poverty in Calcutta, Gever
concludes she did more harm than good.

Throughout his article, Gever bases his conclusions on all false
premises. Despite such irrationality, there is the very real
problem of how to make the results of altruistic behaviour more
positive than negative. We have seen, however, the great progress
of the U.S. economy over time accomplished by both individual
self-reliance and the altruistic actions of many individuals. My
career was substantially aided by the altruistic actions of others.
Likewise, many of the 15,000 UCLA students I have had over the past
43 years benefitted greatly from the altruism of others. It is
without hesitation, therefore, that I emphatically deny the
validity of Gever’s conclusions.

Theodore A. Anderson

Professor of finance (Emeritus)

Mother Teresa deserves praise, not derision

I am thoroughly disgusted by Matthew Gever’s "Aiding others does
more harm than good" (Viewpoint, Oct. 22) and his "freeing"
Libertarian views attacking the most liberated woman of our time
­ Mother Teresa.

I almost laughed aloud when I read that the vice president of
Bruin Libertarians viewed Mother Teresa as "mediocre" and found
"the most annoying thing about Mother Teresa was her continued
devotion to the lives of others." Are you joking?! It isn’t every
day that someone will pack up her bags to spend her life loving the
destitute of Calcutta ­ we don’t, and certainly Gever doesn’t
have the integrity to call her, of all things, mediocre! I think
the word you were looking for was … amazing.

One thing that Gever did get right was that she really made no
sacrifices because she obeyed God’s order for her to go to
Calcutta. Mother Teresa does not preach self-sacrifice. In fact, in
a documentary I saw about Mother Teresa, she claims that she didn’t
sacrifice anything at all; instead she received so much more than
she ever gave.

Mother Teresa is an ideal figure in our society not because of
her hard work in caring for the ignored and oppressed nor for her
tremendous "self-sacrifice;" it was her joy that makes her ideal.
We are in awe of how she was able to be so joyful even though she
did not have the things that we often think will produce happiness.
She is the epitome of someone living life to the fullest, not
regretting anything, but pushing ahead, boldly sucking the marrow
out of life; this is not self-sacrifice.

We are deceiving ourselves if we think that being in this rat
race of our capitalist society is supposed to lead us to freedom
­ working overtime, stressing ourselves out to go get more,
earn more, save more.

What is the point of living if we are only going to run around
our exercise wheels like hamsters all our lives? This false freedom
which leaves us dissatisfied, but always worn out, is not living
one’s own life. I choose ultimate freedom, which calls us out of
this restrictive cage and urges us to really live for ourselves. I,
for one, choose and admire Mother Teresa’s hedonistic philosophy in
not settling for anything less but the best.

Vikki Leung

Fourth-year

Communication studies

Comments, feedback, problems?

© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]