Analysis Of Peter Singer's 'When Giving Hurts Too Much'

1266 Words3 Pages

Vaughn 6

When Giving Hurts Too Much

Baylee Vaughn
XXXXXXX
Dr. XX
19 April 2017 “Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” (1 Timothy 5:8) My interpretation of this passage is simply, “Charity begins at home” which seems to be in direct contrast to Peter Singer’s argument that one is morally obligated to give as much as possible to charities that work to reduce suffering in poor countries, at least up to the point at which by giving more we would begin to cause serious suffering to ourselves and our dependents. (NIV) One cannot deny the tragedy of anyone anywhere suffering and dying from lack of food, shelter, and medical …show more content…

You teach him to fish and you give him an occupation that will feed him for a lifetime” is attributed to a Chinese Proverb. Parts and versions of this quote have been used by many prolific philosophers and influencers when writing or speaking of the importance of educating the poor on how to improve their own plight. In whatever form it is used, this quote imparts much “food for thought.” Singer does not address the fact that catering to one’s immediate needs alone, has the potential to do more harm than good. The disadvantaged can have needs met for a day or a week but without education and examples, their poverty is even more apparent and devastating. (QI) Those that take exception to Peter Singer’s argument have viable concerns. Before writing a check, would it be more prudent to invest in birth control to help stem the overpopulation of these poorer countries. One does not have to push birth control pills for artificial control but actual education on natural family planning. This education could boost the progress of personal hygiene and make a big dent in the elimination of sexually transmitted diseases. Education again would help control the need for medical care. Here, in the real sense, “an ounce of prevention would be much better than a pound of …show more content…

It is hard to deny that we have the moral obligation to do everything in our power to save the life of this child. Singer gets few arguments concerning this action; however, should that moral intuition necessarily extend to someone starving in Africa? This is comparing apples to oranges in a way because one can easily see the imminent danger which will result in certain death if one fails to act immediately. It is difficult to compare the results of the action of one individual when saving the child and the outcome for the poor in

Open Document