How much responsibility should one take for ensuring another's understanding of a topic, given that one is not a teacher? Some may argue that knowledge is key, hence those with knowledge should try, as best as they can, to impart that. From an economic point of view, the development of human capital is important, so that lends support to the argument that there is substantial responsibility. Besides that, the cultural perspective may encourage the passing along of knowledge as being a social responsibility. Labels: musings
It is all fine and dandy when looking at this from a third-party perspective. Standing on a moral high ground has never been easier, advocating that we should take up the roles as unofficial teachers, and concluding the sentiment with a flourish. What about when one has to step into that role? In all likelihood, the active speaker will become a passive bystander, suddenly shirking what he had only moments before espoused. Talk is easy, but taking action requires time and effort, which we may not have in sufficient quantities. All of us have the same number of hours; What convinces us to sacrifice our time to add value to another person's?
If I were to surmise, I'd say that first and foremost, we do what we have to for our own benefits, we look out for ourselves. It is only if we have leftover time and energy that we do things for others' benefits, out of goodwill, or obligation, or coercion. It takes a certain bigness of heart to take responsibility for another person's education. Taking the effort to be responsible for oneself and save others the trouble would be good, no?