Charitable giving, everyday morality and a critique of Bourdieusian theory: An investigation into disinterested judgements, moral concerns and reflexivity in the UK

This paper aims to explain the nature of people’s moral judgements about

charitable giving and volunteering. It identifies three positions on everyday

morality: moral conventionalists, moral individualists and moral critics. In

exploring these, it takes issue with Bourdieu’s view that giving is purely a means

to an end, reinforcing the prestige, influence and economic power of the giver.

Based on interviews with 41 people from different occupations and backgrounds,

the research suggests this is wrong. First, it ignores the complexity of the motives

for giving. Across all three categories, motives are seldom clear-cut, compassion

mixing with self-interest. Second, where charitable activity is concerned, the

benefits to the volunteer are as much about the satisfaction of being seen to

perform a task well as about the social or material advantages that might accrue.