Cosmopolitanism By David Miller

1061 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The roles of citizenship

However, a cosmopolitan would argue that the ethical value and rights granted should apply to every individual, instead of communities or nations. Even David Miller recognizes that it is natural to believe we have a certain obligation or responsibility to others outside our own nation, such as the world’s poor. This is because we are all human and have a humanitarian impulse inside us that makes us concerned with the well-being of others. David Miller would also argue that “nations have a valid claim to be self-determining.” (Miller, 1996, p. 410) He states that it is contradictory to state you believe in liberal values, but also attempt to change or overrule elites in other nations. By this, he means that every nation should have the …show more content…

It is not easy to always practice love and compassion to everyone. This is why similarly to Miller, I believe it is our human nature to favour those we are closest to, such as family and friends. We create special bonds and relationships with particular people and they become our main concern. These relationships may cause us to become self driven. However, this does not change the fact that we are all human beings and hold the same value as one another. We must continuously remind ourselves that others have it worse off, and that we have the means to help them. So why would we choose not to? It is important to help those in need, they do not deserve anything less than wealthier nations do. Therefore, wealthier nations should be obligated to dedicate a percentage of their resources and income to ensuring the wellbeing of individuals in other …show more content…

To this, I would explain how wealthy nations have a quite high standard of living, access to clean water, food, great opportunity, etc. Many individuals who make up the world’s poor are not in a place where they can change their circumstance. This could be due to health conditions due to the lack of human rights, lack of housing, lack of opportunity, corrupt government, environmental factors, where you are born, etc. Many of these factors are not issues that would concern wealthier nations and are presented to them outside of their control. So if only some parts of the world are faced with these challenges, why should they be further punished for it? They certainly did not ask to be born into such conditions. The world’s poor have a clear disadvantage that does not allow them to live the same quality of life as others which is unjust. Everyone should be granted equal

Show More
Related

  • Summary Of Susan Wolf The Meanings Of Lives

    1345 Words  | 3 Pages

    A possible objection to my critique could be that “Although human beings may reserve the right to care about themselves it is egocentric, and not in the best interest for humanity.” The objection to my criticism could extend to even say that “By putting yourself interest ahead of others, you are indeed implying that you are the center of the universe or at least your own universe.” Yes, it is indeed the humane thing to do to put the best interest of others ahead of your own. But humans are not, and should not, forced to put the greater good ahead of their own life. This question is raised commonly in contemporary politics. In my opinion it is the individual’s choice if they so choose to donate time, money or any other resources to those in need. This decision should not be inflicted upon them. This ties back to Wolf’s original statement that “If you care about yourself you’re living as if you’re the center of the universe, which is false.” It is incongruous to believe that if you care about yourself you’re automatically implying that you are the center of the universe. Everyone who functions in society and is a normal human being, to a certain extent, cares about them self, which in my personal opinion is a good

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Peter Singer's Famine, Affluence, And Welfare

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Limit of our Moral Duty in regards to Famine Relief. In the article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer argues that our conceptions of moral belief need to change. Specifically, he argues that giving famine relief is not optional but a moral duty and failing to contribute money is immoral. As Singer puts it, “The way people in affluent countries react. cannot be justified; indeed the whole way we look at moral issues-our moral conceptual scheme-needs to be altered and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society”(135).

    Read More

  • Peter Singer Moral Obligation

    1127 Words  | 3 Pages

    All different ethical theories can look at the same problem and come to different conclusions. Even philosopher’s such as Singer and Arthur understand and view ethical values differently. Peter Singer who uses the utilitarian theory believes that wealthy people should give to the degree that the wealthy person now someone in need themselves. John Arthur believes those in need or those suffering are only entitled to the help of the wealthy person if that person agrees to help, and that the property rights of the wealthy person declines the amount that Singer believes people should. People should help other people. I believe all people deserve the right to receive assistance and to not help those people would be morally wrong. However, I do not believe that the help that we are morally obligated to give should come at the cost of our own well-being.

    Read More

  • Morality of Giving

    1069 Words  | 3 Pages

    How much money is one morally obligated to give to relief overseas? Many In people would say that although it is a good thing to do, one is not obligated to give anything. Other people would say that if a person has more than he needs, then he should donate a portion of what he has. Peter Singer, however, proposes a radically different view. His essay, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” focuses on the Bengal crisis in 1971 and claims that one is morally obligated to give as much as possible. His thesis supports the idea that “We ought to give until we reach the level of marginal utility – that is, the level at which, by giving more, I would cause as much suffering to myself or my dependents as I would relieve by my gift” (399). He says that one's obligation to give to people in need half-way around the world is just as strong as the obligation to give to one's neighbor in need. Even more than that, he says that one should keep giving until, by giving more, you would be in a worse position than the people one means to help. Singer's claim is so different than people's typical idea of morality that is it is easy to quickly dismiss it as being absurd. Saying that one should provide monetary relief to the point that you are in as bad a position as those receiving your aid seems to go against common sense. However, when the evidence he presents is considered, it is impossible not to wonder if he might be right.

    Read More

  • Is There a Duty for Global Wealth Redistribution?

    2413 Words  | 5 Pages

    Theories of global distributive justice address the following sorts of questions. Should we feel morally concerned about the large gap between the developing countries and the developed countries? What duty do us citizens have to provide assistance to the global poor? And what scale should we take the duties to?

    Read More

  • Global Poverty and Philosophy: Why the Capabilities Approach Applies

    2143 Words  | 5 Pages

    Utilitarianism, a famous theory often applied to global poverty issues, first appeared in 19th century England and primarily revolved around the greatest happiness principle. Classical Utilitarianism argues that all people are of equal value, and that it should be everyone’s goal to maximize happiness because happiness is inherently good and valuable. Since Utilitarianism holds all people equal, this means that proximity to poverty does not matter because distance does not decrease the value of human life. It also means that if an action increases overall happiness, you have a duty to help those in need. (Goldworth 315)

    Read More

  • Famine Relief

    1822 Words  | 4 Pages

    In this paper, I will argue against two articles which were written against Singer’s view, and against helping the poor countries in general. I will argue against John Arthur’s article Famine Relief and the Ideal Moral Code (1974 ) ,and Garrett Hardin’s article Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor ( 1976); I will show that both articles are exaggerating the negative consequences of aiding the poor, as well as building them on false assumptions. Both Arthur and Hardin are promoting the self-interest without considering the rights of others, and without considering that giving for famine relief means giving life to many children.

    Read More

  • The Challenges Of The Dust Bowl In America

    734 Words  | 2 Pages

    Firstly research shows that ⅙ newborns are born into poor families. Another reason is poor children struggle with education. Kids that are born into undereducated parents are not likely to succeed at school without help that targets their family problem. Children that spend more than half of their lives in poverty are almost always likely to enter their 20’s without completing high school in contrast to, a child that has never been poor. Poor people with families also struggle with providing necessities. And lastly workers at the bottom of the economic scale barely get by during hard times scraping every last dollar they have from paycheck to

    Read More

  • Comparing Hunger And Hunger

    1260 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hunger and poverty will always exist. Many needy nations are stuck in a black hole, in which, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. This situation could be fixed, if the poor nations had a little help or assistance. Is it morally good for the better off nations to help or support those who are in need? Who benefits from this sponsorship in the long run? Poverty-stricken nations could seek relief if the silk-stocking nations aid in supplying goods. Many of the moneyed nations are torn between helping or not those who are less fortunate. Jonathan Swift and Garrett Hardin have two very different opinions on whether to aid those who were not born into riches. Swift uses a satire for the low-income nations of eating and using offspring

    Read More

  • Global Poverty

    570 Words  | 2 Pages

    Singer, Peter; Miller, Richard "“What Duties Do People in Rich Countries Have to Relieve World Poverty”." Debate, Singer-Miller Debate from Center for the Study of Inequality and the Atlantic Foundation, Ithaca, April 4, 2003.

    Read More

  • Summary Of Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping The Poor

    955 Words  | 2 Pages

    The wealthy countries cannot help everyone, there would not be enough for themselves. People should always do what they can to help one another out, however we can, ignoring the problem will make more problems. By helping out your fellow man it will to help yourself indirectly. Immigration adds to exhaustion of food, and will destroy resources faster. Although, without immigration we would not have such a diverse culture, or exchanging of different ideas. The creation of the World Food Bank was intended to help the poor around the world, but it is used unfairly. Not everyone can contribute equally, so often countries only take from the bank without giving anything back. On the other hand, without the world food bank people would die. Countries should give to the bank if they have extra, or even if they never have to use it for themselves, it is only right.

    Read More

  • Reducing Space Exploration Will Not End Poverty

    696 Words  | 2 Pages

    Maybe their country is fine, low rates of unemployment, people are happy and proud of being part of this developed power of the first world, but meanwhile, while they send space ships to Jupiter, there are other countries who can’t even have access to Internet, and there are millions of people who can’t take home a piece of bread to feed their starving family. Do you think this is fair? Well, I don’t. I think that the capitalist world in which we live in has made the line between the rich and the poor wider, and it will continue to be like this as long the system remains the same. As the rich become richer, the poor become poorer. And I’m not only talking about this case in particular, it happens all the time. Wealthy people have the resources to multiply their money, but poor people have to manage with picking up cartons from the streets because they don’t have any education or resources to obtain their food through other way.

    Read More

  • Poverty in Developing Countries

    590 Words  | 2 Pages

    As developed countries quench their thirsts for petrol, developing countries around the world are left behind, force to watch on without any help from the outside community. Being poor means to be disadvantaged in every single way. It means not being able to support yourself or your family or have the basic necessity to life. Without substantial help for these helpless people then we should be feeling guilty that we are living lives far better than what others are experiencing. Poverty may because by wars, disease or lack of education and infrastructure and the resulting consequences may be hunger, starvation, crime and ultimately death. If poverty is not eradicated then injustice will continue, increasing death tolls and lives.

    Read More

  • How to Make the World a Better Place

    814 Words  | 2 Pages

    If these developed countries continue to prejudge underdeveloped countries by wealth or other conditions, when people are faced with serious problems in society, these problems become global. By helping each other, all countries offer hope and compassion, and share new knowledge with each other. Therefore, people all over the world suffer less, because they know they are not alone.

    Read More

  • Culture Is Ordinary, by Raymond Williams

    1076 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to Cambridge Dictionary, the definition of “culture” is “the way of life, especially the general customs and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time”. On the other hand, accroding to Raymond Williams, it is more complicated. However, ther is something that is certain: Culture is ordinary, which happens to be the title of an article he wrote to define and explain what culture is.

    Read More

More about Cosmopolitanism By David Miller

Open Document