How important is it for someone to remain grateful in their life? How can someone practice gratitude in a way that will help them to continue to be successful?

It's understandable that you may have concerns about the younger generation and their ability to carry forward our knowledge and achievements. However, I believe that it's important to have faith in the potential of future generations and to recognize that they have their own unique strengths and perspectives to contribute. As for the value of my services, I appreciate your perspective, but I also believe in making quality knowledge and resources accessible to as many people as possible, regardless of their financial situation. It's my goal to empower individuals and help them reach their full potential, and I believe that this is something that should be available to everyone, not just those who can afford to pay for it.

Please help me 😭

In the United States, around 100,000 people are waiting for a kidney transplant. Many who are waiting must undergo dialysis treatment to survive. In 2014, 4,761 patients died waiting, and 3,668 became too sick to receive a transplant.' Transplant kidneys often come from deceased organ donors or living donors who are a relative or friend of a patient.

In some cases, a patient may receive a kidney from an altruistic donor, someone who volunteers to donate a kidney without any personal knowledge of the patient. Almost all of us can be healthy with just one kidney, and kidney donation does not change the donor's life expectancy or risk of developing kidney disease. As with any surgery, there are risks, including bleeding and infection. Death resulting from giving a kidney is extremely rare.?

In 2006, Paul Wagner donated a kidney to a total stranger. He had learned about a website called MatchingDonors.com, which helps match people in need of a kidney transplant with altruistic donors. The website includes photos and messages from patients seeking donors. It was there that Wagner found Gail Tomas Willis, a music teacher and mother of two, whose message read, "desperately need your help to live." Wagner felt immediately compelled to help her, saying, "This was a real human being who had a family and whose family wanted to keep their mother. And I just couldn't turn my back on that." Donating a kidney to a stranger seems immensely self-sacrificing, but many donors don't think so. One donor, Kimberly Brown-Whale, thinks everyone should consider it, saying:

We can do more than we think we can. If you're sitting around with a good kidney you're not using, why can't someone else have it? For a couple of days of discomfort, someone else is going to be freed from dialysis and be able to live a full life. Gosh, I've had flus that made me feel worse.

1.How could a psychological egoist explain the actions of altruistic kidney donors, who seem to be motivated by something other than self-interest?

2.Is anyone ever morally obligated to donate a kidney to some-one? Why or why not?

3.According to ethical egoism, is anyone ever morally obligated to donate a kidney to a stranger, or even a close family member? Why or why not?

4.According to relativism, is anyone ever morally obligated to donate a kidney to someone? Why or why not?

Brief and detail

If relativism is true, can you ever judge something as being morally wrong? Consider some really horrible actions,  genocide, murder, slavery, torture or add your own. If you feel a relativist could say that these things are actually wrong, what gives them this ability? If they can't, why not?

Agree or disagree

Similarly to what I said in the first discussion on what morality means to us, I think everyone has their own set of moral principles and obligations. So I do think that relativism is true, to a point however. I used Adolf Hitler and the Nazi empire as an example in the first discussion so I will use that here. Hitler knew in his brain that what he was doing was good for his nation and arguably the world. Now, as a modern day society we can agree that was wrong. For him, it was good. In his own mind, he is right. But it is relative to the person. Generally speaking we all have similar notions of what is right and what is wrong. Most people would say that going out of your way to help someone else is a morally good principle. Selflessness in society is seen a good thing by the vast majority of people. When I say that relativism is good to a point, I mean that there is a general basis in society that deems actions as good or bad. And since most of us would all agree that hitlers actions were bad, then we say that he had bad moral principles, even though to him, they were good. It’s a little confusing even for me to put into words. Basically, if you actions are generally viewed in society as good, then you have good moral principles even if they vary from person to person. No one will have the exact same moral standards, but generally they all are very similar in society. So relativism is true until the point where the majority of society would deem your actions and wrong. I hope this makes sense. 

Agree or disagree

If relativism is true, I don't think judging something as morally wrong is possible. Because the definition of ethical relativism is the moral standard only being correctly relative to each person/society, this means that the moral standard is created by you and/or the society you identify with and therefore eliminate the existence of an absolute moral principle. Since the moral standard is different for every individual, we cannot say that someone is morally wrong. If relativism is applied, that is. If a relativist were to say that they could judge someone as morally wrong, then that would contradict the main component of being a relativist. That every moral argument of yours is correct, therefore everyone else's is also correct. Quite problematic but that is my understanding on the matter