Which religion is more giving?

40

Ace magician Luís de Matos recently posted this photo on his facebook post (and David B brought it to my attention):

religion

I think it is an interesting idea. Would it be good for charities to ask people to specify their religion when they make an online donation, and then show the results per head per religion? Do you think it would encourage people to give more?

40 comments on “Which religion is more giving?

  1. Steve says:

    I don’t think it’s really fair, it depends on the area he’s begging in ie how many Buddhist’s pass by compared to Xstians? How many Jews will be passing him on a Saudi street?

    • ch3burashka says:

      I think you’re taking this “study” too literally. Obviously this isn’t a sanctioned experiment, but rather a neat thought experiment that would leave anyone who had encountered this man with plenty to think about – both about the results, and their own participation.

      As for Buddhists vs. Xstians, I think we can safely assume what the relative concentrations are.

    • Cymon says:

      I think this is a blatant attempt to benefit from the most zealous and competitive group more than which is more generous. (That being the case my money is on the Atheists.) If this were a study it would be done blind, without the parties involved knowing their involvement until the result. As it is this guy is going to get a lot of donations, but not a lot of data, which really is all he cares about I’m thinking.

    • JOHN says:

      Realist! No bowl for the Jews!

  2. Anonymous says:

    No bowl for consumerism?

  3. Gamification for the win! I think it could encourage people to give more, but only in some situations, like if a persons favourite religion looked like it might be able to catch up with the next most donated.

    Of course, atheists and the generally unrelgious will love it, because it’ll show quite clearly how much more giving they are comapred to their ‘compassionate’ clasically relgious bretheren, and that’s a big thing for atheists (because of the silly perception that they are just selfish, uncaring headonists).

    The actual collected data would only be interesting if it were aggregated over a number of charities in a large number of regions. As Steve says, it’s subject to more bias than you can shake a stick at if you just set up stall like the guy in the photo.

    Great idea though🙂

  4. Gabriel says:

    I think it would be rather inconclusive. There’s just too much variation amongst the ideology of people let alone people from each religious groups. Some people are more connected to their religion whilst others are just aren’t.

    Food for thought though. From a Christian standpoint, “If all Christians acted like Christ, the whole world would be Christian.” Mahatma Gandhi and there simply wouldn’t be guys like this.

    Go Figure.

    • Gus Snarp says:

      The question isn’t whether this is a good experiment or we can trust the results, the question is whether this works. Is this kind of competition likely to lead to this guy (or a charity) taking home more money at the end of the day?

  5. Atheist,Agnostic,Pagan are no religions😉

    • sidney18511 says:

      Oh yes. They have their own beliefs. You would consider them a religious catagory. And it will be ONE of these people, that cared about their fellow man.

    • Dave says:

      I don’t know about the Pagans, Sid, but the other two are characterised by a lack of belief in imaginary or nebulously unverifiable concepts.

      So no, they are not religions, but the experiment would be a bit rubbish without them being included.

    • One Eyed Jack says:

      @Sidnety18511

      “Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.” – Penn Jillette

    • Richard's Dorkings says:

      Dave
      Atheists are characterised by their unverifiable belief in the non-existence of God.

    • Vyatcheslav Korneev says:

      Atheists don`t believe that the God does not exist, they think so. There is a great difference between the blind belief and the logical conclusion.

  6. david dredge says:

    How about a fight amongst ‘religions’ to see who is best?

  7. Dawn says:

    I think you have a good point there, and I think charities would get more money from people. I think a lot of people have strong beliefs and would want to show that there belief was the best.

  8. geodetective says:

    I think it would lead to complaining. Also, you can probably see that Christians give more to Christian organizations and that atheists give more to nonreligious organizations.

    There is also another problem with this idea: http://www.biblija.net/biblija.cgi?Bible=Bible&m=mat+6%3A1-4&id32=1&pos=0&set=3&l=en

  9. sidney18511 says:

    It will be the atheists. THEY will be the MOST giving.

  10. Shahram says:

    I have a better idea. collect all beggers around the world and asked them which religion they believe. Then we can conclude which relegion is more generous and which one more mean.
    for example, if most of them are Muslems, then Muslems are mean ….

  11. Lazy T says:

    Full marks to Al Murray, he’s probably massivly increased his ‘take’ with that strategy, next week he should try ” Fans of which breakfast cereal are the most generous?”

    • One Eyed Jack says:

      I think bowls labeled Democrat, Republican, and Independent would work well.

      I’d add Tea Party, but he might get shot.

  12. Gus Snarp says:

    I think creating this kind of game absolutely encourages more giving. Of course, one has to rely on the recipient being honest about the results of the game – in the case of the panhandler, he could easily shift the money around to favor his religion of choice or to goad other religions when no one was looking.

    Look at Kiva.org. They’ve been using lending teams for a long time, the competition is fairly friendly, and many people are on many teams, but the top team is the atheist team, followed closely by the Christian team. There’s also a Mormon team that’s doing very well.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Learning to spell words correctly might help.

  14. zariski says:

    He is a genius! LOL
    By the way, what kind of genus is H…. and I …. H on the center?

  15. Anomynous says:

    Many structured religions have organized charitable activities and thus their members, when passing a beggar, are likely to have an “I gave at the church” reaction. This would skew the beggar’s results towards non-structured religions or the non-religion categories.

    • Gus Snarp says:

      Maybe. On the other hand, I as an atheist routinely give to my local food bank and homeless shelter, and never to panhandlers. I’m not sure there’s a systematic bias there.

    • One Eyed Jack says:

      A valid point, but there are other factors to consider.

      In the US, Christians are by far the largest group. Of those, only 25% attend church weekly, so the argument “they gave at church” is a weak one.

      I think the bigger concern would be the beggar intentionally skewing results by moving money around. He could easily short one group to shame them into giving more. We don’t know, but kudos to the man in the photo for his clever idea.

  16. Henry says:

    I’ve studied this issue extensively, and while nobody carefully tracks it, a few things are clear from what statistics are available, and the “best practices” promoted by consultants who specialize in religious fundraising. 1) Most of the money and volunteer time donated by avid members of a religion goes to their own church, synagogue, mosque or temple. 2) Most of that money and time — typically 75-99% — goes to support the building, staff salaries and programs for members. 3) People who are not avid members of a religion typically donate less time and money to “charity,” but most of their donations go to secular charities or causes. 4) Most of the money and time donated to secular charities or causes — typically 60-90% — goes toward the mission of the group (e.g., alleviating homelessness, feeding the poor, curing cancer, etc.). So, the answer to Luis De Matos’ question is that religions care about perpetuating themselves, and if you really care about homelessness or some other charitable cause, stay away from religion.

  17. Emma says:

    OK, so I’m being a bit arsey, but Buddhism isn’t (apparently) a religion. Isn’t it supposed to be a philosophy? And surely the whole point of Atheism is that it’s not a religion? I give to people on the street because I think it’s the right thing to do – I know many would probably disagree. I think it’s a good idea, but I don’t think that other people should HAVE to agree with me or that religion should have anything to do with it. States should look after all their people, homeless or not. I think the whole idea of charity is a bit suspect because it seems to absolve govts of having to look after some of their people – as if the people left out are somehow less worthy. But in practical terms, if the government sees fit not to look after these people, then they can’t just be left to try to get on with it – that’s heartless. (I say all this as someone with a disability, btw.)

    • xlr8r says:

      Buddhism is a religion because it deals with soul and afterlife and stuff and I would add Eastern ones are much more respectful of the completeness of human being, they have a depth some quick commandments could only dream of (you will never hear a bishop or imam speak about meditation to their followers).

      This said it feels funny for me because it assumes you perfectly know what religion you belong to. I am not so sure but I am sure what ones I do not belong to.

  18. JOHN says:

    Realist! No bowl for the Jews!

  19. Richard's Dorkings says:

    Glad to see that Luis categorises atheism as a religion – which, of course, it is.
    Don’t think that agnosticism as a religion however.

  20. Jerry says:

    It is interesting that the “Agnostic” and Atheist” bowls appear to have the most money in them (thank G-d) for that! However, if this man was clever he could sit in front of a Christian-philosophy based church, “seed” his bowls such that his “Christian” bowl was overflowing with cash and watch what happens. Then he would move his operation to a Jewish synagogue , seed the “Jewish” bowl and watch what happens, etc.

  21. sulliwan says:

    Open problem: what is the optimal amount of money to keep in each bowl in order to get the most total donations?

  22. […] And just a closing thought I found on the blog of Richard Wiseman: […]

  23. Jeneane says:

    Giving is good for the soul. If you want to know who gets government money to spend on charities read the Wall Street Journal 7/18/13. Personally I’d like the Government to let me have my money to spend on the charities I suppost, not what the Governmane wants to support

  24. Tazio says:

    As a part of the experiment itself, I would have added a bowl with the label “Satanist” and five five dollar bills (or the equivalent) in it. I bet that would have raised the amount of money several other bowl received.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s