Staggering numbers often fail to spur action. If we don’t know someone affected, numbers stay in the denominator. We react with, “It’s unfortunate that all those people are suffering.” We leave unsaid, “Well at least nobody I know...”
Humanity’s success depends in large part to our ability to coordinate with & care for one another. We have built impressive structures, processes, and incentives to effectively coordinate - religion, patriotism, capitalism, govt., etc.
Yet, where those systems are weak or absent (e.g. a tragedy in another country), our ‘care’ reduces. The concepts of “mankind” or “humanity” don’t elicit a strong sense of togetherness today. We are more tribal than we‘d like to be.
Many charities try to get us to know and care about strangers by telling us moving stories about individuals - suddenly, we can’t hide behind, “Well at least nobody I know is suffering.” It becomes uncomfortable, emotional - a numerator problem - if only briefly.
Even then, many of us step back and remind ourselves:
We don’t really know that person or that community
We need not feel feel compelled to help
A quick step-back to tribalism, under the guise of rationality.
In an unequal world, where suffering can be dramatically reduced by coordinating / helping across boundaries, how can we enable sufficient empathy to spur action, at scale?