Summary Of The Singer Solution To World Poverty

760 Words2 Pages

In “The Singer Solution to World Poverty”, professor of bioethics, Peter Singer, responds with a solution, to eliminate poverty. “The formula is simple: whatever money you’re spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away.”. Singers argument runs on facts that there are people who lack necessities. Say for example you are one who has more than just necessities, you could therefore help someone with their necessity, by cutting parts of your comfort . His deductive reasoning may sound viable in theory, although in reality, it’s easier said than actually being possible.
Singers ideology is based off of the good human morals and values that seems to lack in todays society. Helping those who have fallen on hard times has never been a bad idea. Being generous to the less fortunate has never been a bad idea. Encouraging support to those in need has never been a bad
Yes, that is one good example but, can the whole human race do that in correspondence? Singers attempt to influence generosity also influences the idea of equality. This idea of equality can be seen as a con. After the Bolshevik revolution, the Soviet Union was built around the ideology of Communism, although it soon became a totalitarian state. 1991, The collapse of the Soviet Union was a triumph of democracy over totalitarianism, not over communism. Put into simple words, communism does not work. Singer may not be referring to communism, but rather the idea of equality and there is a thin difference between the two. Human nature also has a play in this. There is, and always will be one who’s ambition will thrive off of leading and being ahead of others, like the Bolshevik government that led the Soviet Union. We all want to be generous to those in need, but at who’s expense if you don’t want it to be your own every time? So would “Singers Solution” be possible as a whole human race all in

Open Document