"Give" -The little stream

This is what I liked: fighting drug resistant TB: Doing what is right regardless of the cost. "screw what's practical...it's the right thing to do, so do it." Its interesting that Peter mentioned President Monson, who has always struck me as someone who has been attentive to the one. I believe he would have a higher beta than Farmer as well, but I don't think that's the point. I think Jesse said it right. I think we all fall short of B=1. I think that's the point of the book—it should motivate us to give more (time, money, whatever).

One thing that bugged me: The author's worship of Paul Farmer—the creation of a modern Saint. Of course, I was amazed that someone could do so much, and maybe I'm just jealous because I'll never have a book written about me or save so many lives. I don't feel like what I do is trivial, but I'm obviously not doing as much good. I don't feel the need to move to Haiti, however.

On the neglected family: From my read, it sounds like he visits his family occasionally. In fact, I wished the author would have addressed this. Since I have a “hermeneutic of generosity” for Farmer (I really liked that—Margaret Miles' hermeneutic of generosity but not suspiscion), I'll assume this superman is a great family man as well, and that Farmer made his family was off limits to the author.

What the book did for me: If I feel like I need to justify how little I'm doing to help others, I'm probably not doing enough. I feel guilty when I think that over a 1/3 of the world lives on less than $2 a day. I did feel the desire to set up a microcredit establishment (you economic people, help me out), like the church's PEF.

Looking at Alvin's question:
How much are Farmer's clinics really helping when the root causes are bad governments? Is it really worth the monetary and emotional effort to save a couple lives when there are so many poor and hurting people that it is impossible to save them all? Isn't it like putting your hand up to stop a river?

Without discussing the root causes of poverty and illness, I think that the answer to the question gets at the solution to the guilt complex the book succeeds at creating: each of us should decide where we can do the most good. Forgive me for getting religious, but I believe in the statement by Ezra Taft Benson: “The Lord works from the inside out. The world works from the outside in. The world would take people out of the slums. Christ takes the slums out of people, and then they take themselves out of the slums. The world would mold men by changing their environment. Christ changes men, who then change their environment. The world would shape human behavior, but Christ can change human nature.”

So I feel that while each of us can do some temporal good for others, the real good that we can do is share the good news—I don't mean by donating to the missionary fund or by setting a good example, but by helping people come to Christ. I don't think our world is going to get any better collectively, but if I'm going to dedicate more time to others, I believe the time I have should be spent sharing the thing I have which is of most value to me—the Gospel. I know I can do more; right now we've got Strange Brew playing in the background, so obviously I have more discretionary time to make a difference.