Then why all the philosophy about what "kind of person" he was and whether he would use the money "for other purposes"?
If someone asks me for money, and I give them money, it becomes their money, and it is none of my business what they choose to do with it, any more than it is any of their business (or yours!) what I would have done with it if I kept it.
Otherwise, you're not really giving them help, you're taking some amount of control over their life.
"If someone asks me for money, and I give them money, it becomes their money, and it is none of my business what they choose to do with it"
It isn't if your idea of help is unconditional donation. But is there anything wrong if I see donations as investments (in society) with expected returns on the same? Would I be wrong in trying to maximize my returns?
Where did I mention that my objective was maximizing my influence? The objective is improvement in the society. My influence has nothing to do with it.
The point is, just giving money does not absolve us of our moral responsibility. If I donate with an objective of social good, not just with the idea of dispensing my spare wealth, it is my right and duty to see that my investments give the maximal return, i.e. maximal social good.
Of course I can be wrong/ suboptimal in my investment strategies but then I can improve.
