We often view generosity as an ideal human quality – a virtue attainable only by a privileged, wealthy few.
Being generous is seen as a behavioral exception that people aren’t able to choose until and unless certain advantageous life circumstances coexist.
For instance, people will say:
“I’d give if I made more money,” or
“I’ll give when I’m older and in a more stable place,”
“I’d give if I wasn’t paying off student loans.”
And these responses are viewed as socially acceptable – even acceptable to many advancement folk!
But, what if, we embraced a different definition and understanding of generosity? What if generosity came to be viewed not so much as an ideal or an almost-out-of-reach virtue for the masses, but as a prosocial responsibility we all share? A common behavior for the common good.
Think registering to vote and voting.
Think serving on a jury.
Heck, think being productive and paying taxes.
Each is an example of a communal responsibility we, generally, share in common. Each is something we can all do regardless of our financial or other life circumstances.
In fact, most will agree (again, generally) that all should behave in these ways. In fact, we may even encourage and/or help other people do these things.
The understanding of generosity could be renovated in similar fashion. But with even more pleasing and positive byproducts.
Being generous, in this conceptualization, wouldn’t be about wealth. It wouldn’t only become a practice after people were “financially set,” or felt as if they, “had enough.”
Instead, being generous would be something all would be encouraged to participate in. It would be something everyone could and should do. Being generous would not be about the gift amount, it would be about the giving. And, individuals, families, and communities would be happier, healthier, and more hopeful.
Just imagine the positive changes that would occur.
Maybe redefining generosity is the work we should be doing.