I believe it’s to make atonement, which is more closely related to punishment than to helping others. There is a component of both present in atonement, however. Note that you will not see many people punishming themselves in ways unrelated to their crime (hair shirts, self-flagellation, etc) outside of religious communities that believe the true problem of wrongdoing is distancing oneself from a deity rather than harming others. But you will also not see many people atoning for wrongdoing by finding the cheapest possible way to create sufficient good to counterbalance the harm they’ve committed. Rather, most people try to find hard/painful ways to do good. Often this involves nonfinancial contributions.
Maybe it’s to signal that your misdeed was a one-time lapse rather than coming from any deep inner tendency.
For example, if you run over a cat, you might donate money to an animal shelter, which shows that despite what happened you really like animals and would never run one over intentionally.
The financial punishment angle can’t hurt, though.
This is slightly off-topic (as it doesn’t help distinguish between Yvian’s hypothesis and T&C’s) but anyway:
People who feel guilty sometimes give to charity, right?
Is the social purpose of giving (in this case) therefore to punish yourself financially rather than actually help anyone?
I believe it’s to make atonement, which is more closely related to punishment than to helping others. There is a component of both present in atonement, however. Note that you will not see many people punishming themselves in ways unrelated to their crime (hair shirts, self-flagellation, etc) outside of religious communities that believe the true problem of wrongdoing is distancing oneself from a deity rather than harming others. But you will also not see many people atoning for wrongdoing by finding the cheapest possible way to create sufficient good to counterbalance the harm they’ve committed. Rather, most people try to find hard/painful ways to do good. Often this involves nonfinancial contributions.
Maybe it’s to signal that your misdeed was a one-time lapse rather than coming from any deep inner tendency.
For example, if you run over a cat, you might donate money to an animal shelter, which shows that despite what happened you really like animals and would never run one over intentionally.
The financial punishment angle can’t hurt, though.
Interesting. My introspection says no… for what that’s worth. Usually I feel more good than bad when I give to charity.
Good! That’s how it should be.
I was thinking about only the people who give as a response to guilt. Do you give mainly when you feel guilty, or at other times?
Also, have we addressed whether in general guilty people who self-punish feel good doing so (even as it puts them at a material/social disadvantage)?