The Food Bank
The case study concerning the Food Bank demonstrates a conflict of perspectives on a matter which roots from similar powers of motivation, however highlights a key incoherence between the viewpoints from Michelle and Tim. From both individuals we behold a sense of generosity and fairness; and truly feel that they’re trying to reach out and help a community in need, however they feel that there are different approaches to best resolve the issue at hand.
Michelle and her associate, Tim, are running a neighbourhood house which teaches its clients useful skills, such as how to cook and grow vegetables in a garden. In addition, the Neighbourhood House accepts non-perishable food donations for people who are in need. However, Michelle has noticed that the health of many of the regular clientele who consume the donations has deteriorated through the years due to the unhealthy nature of most donations. To resolve the issue at its roots, Michelle has imposed a ban on all foods which she deems ‘nutrient-poor’ so that the needy may have access to healthy food through the Neighbourhood House. However, contrary to what Michelle had hoped, donations go down and the shelves begin looking bare. Tim believes that this is counter-productive to the cause of the Neighbourhood House and asks her to lift this ban.
Both Michelle and Tim are acting in what they believe to be in the best of the impoverished interests; however, depending on what values one prioritizes, the effectiveness of the approaches can be debated. Michelle has witnessed first hand how the donations of processed goods are negatively impacting the same people she’s trying to help. She demonstrates the value she holds for primary principles such as justice, courage, and love. Michelle is being courageous by taking a stand on the issue and voicing her opinions, as well as acting in a form which corresponds with her belief. She’s also demonstrating her love for the people she helps, and shows us that she believes she’s acting in a manner which will ultimately benefit the needy the most. To attempt to solve the injustice which she believes is occurring, she imposes a ban on unhealthy donations. Tim maintains that the primary purpose of the House is to ensure that the needy have enough food to eat. He also demonstrates his courage in taking a stand for his beliefs, but he’s also showing his sense of moderation and realizes that if the imposed ban is negatively impacting the needy, then it should [logically] be lifted.
To begin resolving the issue at hand, we must look at the problem from all perspectives. We have to acknowledge that helping the impoverished is in fact a collective effort which requires everyone to fulfill a certain role. Whether that role consists of volunteering at the house itself, or whether it comes from the community which provides the donations, the issue cannot be solved from the will of a single individual. Michelle has demonstrated her commitment to providing the best possible service for those in need, however she has failed to both predict how the community would respond, as well as address the new issue [lack of food] which has arisen. The ban could’ve resulted in two outcomes. The community could have realized that the unhealthy donations do not help the needy, and could’ve donated healthy foods instead. However, the community responded in a different manner, and begun donating less food instead. This shows us that in a collective effort, all contributors must understand what their role is, and what the goal is. We can often look back at ancient philosophy and witness how they ideas developed thousands of years ago are still relevant today. Socrates’ work helps us understand how to best behave in our pursuit of happiness and effectiveness. Socrates has developed the terms of ‘justice’ and ‘injustice’ in a manner that we may apply it to the Food Bank issue we’re facing. According to Socrates, “[I]njustice has the power, first, to make whatever it arises in… incapable of achieving anything as a unit… [A]nd second, it makes that unit an enemy.” (Griffin, AT4). At the current moment, there is injustice occurring in the effort to help the needy. The donators and the Neighbourhood House do not have a clear understanding on what their role is in providing the best service to the clients, which has resulted in them being incapable of achieving their goal.
There are two approaches to solving the problem that the Neighbourhood House is facing. The options are to either lift the ban, or keep the ban. However, since we’ve established this is not a singular effort, instead a collective one, the main concern is that all contributors have the same understanding of what the goal is. We have already witnessed that the donators haven’t responded to the ban as Michelle had hoped. The donators do not have a clear understanding of what the purpose of the ban is, and responded by donating less. However, if Michelle had information sessions or educated a larger portion of the public on the issues that the impoverished are facing, then she could begin reaping results from the new policy. The other route we could take, consists of lifting the ban on the nutrient-poor goods. However, through this approach, Michelle and Tim have to go to greater lengths to educate their clients on the nutritional values of the goods they’re consuming. Ultimately, Michelle and Tim and attempting to ensure that the needy do not go to bed hungry, and the best way to ensure this, is that all donations are accepted. From there, it is up to do impoverished to make their own decisions on how to spend their disposable income, as well as decide what donations they’re willing to consume.
Works Cited
Griffin, Michael. “Athenian Thought 4: Plato & Aristotle. Socrates.arts, Michael Griffin, 6 Jan. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2016.
This case study was done for my Philosophy 211 course with Professor Griffin. In the course we’ve examined Plato’s Dialogues and have examined some of Socrates’ work in depth. This course provided an opportunity for me to adopt different perspectives on matters, as well as mold my outlook toward issues which may arise in life. This case study was an interesting opportunity to witness how some of the concepts of Justice which Socrates discussed thousands of years ago are still relevant. While doing this study, it was very intriguing to see how injustice, as Socrates defines it, could be detrimental to a common cause though good intent may be present.