I understand where he's coming from. His point is that if all this image does is make people feel like they've fulfilled their philanthropic duties just by reacting emotionally, then it's doing more harm than good. The idea here is that it would actually hamper philanthropy because we'd all feel less of a need to go out and help. The guy in the image, after all, seems to have this well taken care of, so my job here is done, right?

This is a classically cynical and narrow way to view this. As I said in my earlier comment, cynicism has its place. It's important to think critically about these things. But cynicism by itself isn't constructive at all. The criticism should be accompanied by a solution to the supposed problem, or it's not much more than a complaint. Maliceforidiots didn't offer a solution, so I fail to see how his comment is even a bit constructive, yet you claim his is the most constructive comment here. Why?

You might argue that he's shaming people into action, but that's not exactly the best motivator. I don't think it's likely that people are going feel spurred into action by the implication that they think they're kind, but aren't really unless they do something. No, it's much more likely that they'll feel inspired by a positive example, such as, you know, the very act depicted in the image.

You could also argue that he's saying it would be better if the image weren't shared, based on the argument that it does more harm than good being a barrier to philanthropy and everything. But, the people who aren't going to respond and go out and help probably weren't going to do so anyway. They will likely feel good when they see this and then carry on as usual, but I seriously doubt they canceled their plans to help at the soup kitchen after today's Reddit browse. So, zero difference was made with them. But, if even one person seeing this image felt compelled to go out and do something similarly charitable, then that's a net victory, is it not? So, my point is that it's fine if some people remain unchanged because the people who are inspired will contribute to a net positive result. Thus, it's better to share the image than not.

My overall point is that this photograph does more good than harm. I think Maliceforidiots's point that it does more harm than good is based on an overly negative and cynical view of human nature that, by itself, is harmful.

Have you ever watched a standing ovation unfold? It starts with one person, and it spreads from there. Eventually, even the people in the crowd who hate the idea of standing and clapping will find themselves getting out of their chairs because when a lot of people come together to do something it has a powerful influence and momentum. This image represents another person standing up.