Comments on: Emotion & Logic in Philanthropy http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:24:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy#comment-544 Sean Stannard-Stockton Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:19:54 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/05/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy/#comment-544 Well put Tidy Sum. Kirk was an emotional, human hero who constantly struggled to not let his emotions get the best of him. Spock was literally not human. He and McCoy played the role of Kirk's emotions and intellect battling for control. Spock would be a terrible philanthropist. I think human heroes like Kirk are far better philanthropist. But they need to listen to their intellect as well as their emotions. In philanthropy today, Spock doesn't have much pull with Kirk. McCoy is running around shouting "I'm a doctor, not a philanthropist. But those kids are dying Jim. We've gotta save them!". We need Spock to have some input on how to save those kids. Well put Tidy Sum. Kirk was an emotional, human hero who constantly struggled to not let his emotions get the best of him. Spock was literally not human. He and McCoy played the role of Kirk’s emotions and intellect battling for control.

Spock would be a terrible philanthropist. I think human heroes like Kirk are far better philanthropist. But they need to listen to their intellect as well as their emotions. In philanthropy today, Spock doesn’t have much pull with Kirk. McCoy is running around shouting “I’m a doctor, not a philanthropist. But those kids are dying Jim. We’ve gotta save them!”.

We need Spock to have some input on how to save those kids.

]]> By: Tidy Sum http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy#comment-543 Tidy Sum Sun, 09 Sep 2007 19:32:27 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/05/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy/#comment-543 Spock: "Captain, your philanthropy is not rational." Kirk: "Dr. Spock. The romance of rationalism is seductive, but I don't buy it." Spock: "You have a point captain. Government is rarely rational. Neither is academia. And, we have seen how so called strategic philanthropy is fraught with emotion, bias, and politics as well" Kirk: "And, what self-respecting funder would admit that their philanthropy was not strategic or that their analysis was encumbered by organizational politics, ego, or the political economy of the philanthropic exchange". Spock: "That would be illogical captain". Spock: “Captain, your philanthropy is not rational.”

Kirk: “Dr. Spock. The romance of rationalism is seductive, but I don’t buy it.”

Spock: “You have a point captain. Government is rarely rational. Neither is academia. And, we have seen how so called strategic philanthropy is fraught with emotion, bias, and politics as well”

Kirk: “And, what self-respecting funder would admit that their philanthropy was not strategic or that their analysis was encumbered by organizational politics, ego, or the political economy of the philanthropic exchange”.

Spock: “That would be illogical captain”.

]]> By: Katya Andresen http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy#comment-542 Katya Andresen Wed, 05 Sep 2007 21:36:47 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/05/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy/#comment-542 Thanks for the hat tip Sean and for your question on my blog. I think an important nuance is people give for emotional reasons but they also want to see results that show they made a difference for someone. I blogged on that intersection yesterday at http://www.nonprofitmarketingblog.com/comments/on_love_attachment_and/#comments Thanks for your thoughtful analysis, good stuff as always! Thanks for the hat tip Sean and for your question on my blog. I think an important nuance is people give for emotional reasons but they also want to see results that show they made a difference for someone. I blogged on that intersection yesterday at http://www.nonprofitmarketingblog.com/comments/on_love_attachment_and/#comments Thanks for your thoughtful analysis, good stuff as always!

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy#comment-541 Sean Stannard-Stockton Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:18:33 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/05/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy/#comment-541 Thanks Arlene. I have the Charlie Rose show on my list of stuff to watch. Thanks Arlene. I have the Charlie Rose show on my list of stuff to watch.

]]> By: Arlene Spencer http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy#comment-540 Arlene Spencer Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:07:48 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/09/05/emotion-logic-in-philanthropy/#comment-540 Sean, Very interesting post. Masses vs. one; passion vs. thought through analysis. Food for thought. Judith Rodin, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, alluded to the same during her interview on PBS' August 22 Charlie Rose show. I summarized it at: http://thegrantplant.blogspot.com/2007/08/grant-writers-get-inside-peek-on-where.html I'll be back. Incredible blog. Best, Arlene Sean,
Very interesting post. Masses vs. one; passion vs. thought through analysis. Food for thought. Judith Rodin, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, alluded to the same during her interview on PBS’ August 22 Charlie Rose show. I summarized it at:
http://thegrantplant.blogspot.com/2007/08/grant-writers-get-inside-peek-on-where.html

I’ll be back. Incredible blog.

Best, Arlene

]]>