In answering a letter over at his blog about recent natural disasters, Sam says this:

I perused the article you reference and agree that you need to do more than discuss or agree/disagree. I’d start from the standpoint that the author’s argument is true - that people act more when it’s close to home. If you need more proof, check out this link about recent giving in the wake of tragedy.

More money went to Katrina than the tsunami or Burma, even though there were far (FAR) fewer deaths. Why is that?

In other words, I’d ask the class the question, “If a kid drowns in Burma, and no one’s around to notice, does it matter?”

Of course if does, like Gandhi’s son said in the Post article. But how can it matter TO US? That’s the real question of ethics, whether you’re a utilitarian or not - human behavior mainly operates on the question of what does it matter TO ME.

There’s a whole lot more.

Head here to read the rest.