3 ms·
That comparison doesn't work unless the lawyer is also donating lawyer-work to the soup kitchen, either directly or indirectly (with money earned). Then you cou
by rcoveson 3y ago
That comparison doesn't work unless the lawyer is also donating lawyer-work to the soup kitchen, either directly or indirectly (with money earned). Then you could say the time at the soup kitchen is for the sake of motivation and understanding, as is the case with the mandatory time behind the Avis service desk.
But if the lawyer is doing the volunteer manual labor hour instead of donating the much more valuable specialized work hour, then it's nothing like the Avis example.
- slothtrop 3y agoRight it's not mutually exclusive, but they are suggesting that the donation potential would be higher if they chose to work overtime instead of volunteering. This could only matter if said lawyer was attempting to maximize the dollars donated - no one does this anyway. And scarcely you'd find someone motivated to work lots of overtime (why have an arbitrary number of 1 hour?) just to give it all away immediately. People have more than one incentive and desire in play. The "utility-maximizing" choice, if both "effectiveness" and "feeling good" matters, would be to donate whatever one cares to and volunteer as much as one cares to.