Famine, Affluence, and Morality

2018 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The singer solution to poverty

“Famine, Affluence, and Morality”

In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer is trying to argue that “the way people in relatively affluent countries react to a situation… cannot be justified; indeed,… 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”(Singer 230). Peter Singer provides striking examples to show the reader how realistic his arguments are. In this paper, I will briefly give a summary of Peter Singer’s argument and the assumptions that follow, adding personal opinions for or against Peter’s statements. I hope that within this paper, I am able to be clearly show you my thoughts in regards to Singer.

Peter Singer organizes his arguments into an outline form allowing a reader to take individual thoughts, adding them together giving a “big picture.” Within the first few pages, Singer shares two guiding assumptions in regards to his argument to which I stated above. The first assumption states “that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad” (231). Singer steps away from the typical writing style; he states the assumption yet he does not give a personal comment in regards to the assumption. He chooses to do so because the assumption itself is surely uncontroversial; most people would agree, but to those who don’t agree, there are so many possibilities at which to arrive to this assumption that, after all, if they don’t yet comprehend its truth, it would be hard to convince them of its accuracy. Speaking for myself, if I encountered an individual that does not agree to the assumption that death by avoidable causes is bad; I would not hesitate to declare them of being heartless. There are many cases, whether across oceans on foreign land or areas to which we live, where people are dying because of inescapable, unfortunate reasons. Within such cases, even a possible little voice in the back of the head can lead one to wonder who has the responsibility of helping those who are enduring such unnecessary deaths. This sense of wonder leads us to Singer’s second assumption; “if it is in our power to prevent something from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it” (231). To better clarify what this assumption is looking for, Singer points out that “It requires u...

... middle of paper ...

...hly or would we be using only what is necessary? No sin is such a hopeless thought to wish of, therefore my next thought drifts to wishing people could become less selfish, giving to others and making of themselves as equal beings; sacrificing the extra benefits to allow more people to live in peace and harmony.

I hope that more people can become aware of being charitable: to give more of themselves and their blessed lifestyles to others less fortunate. I think that we can all still live just as happy with less stuff. Singer gives great logical arguments for and against his first argument, showing us that there is more that can be done and that we need to see those possibilities more clearly. We need to use the heart and gifts God gave us to benefit and bless others who are suffering. I hope that my views came as clearly as they seemed to be in my head. I feel like I connected well to what Singer was arguing, whether that be because it should have been a simple reading or because I have the possible mind of a philosopher, I am confident that I am now aware more of what I should be giving in order to help.

Works Cited

Singer, Peter. Famine, Affluence, and Mortality.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of Peter Singer And Onora O Neill's Position On Famine Relief

    1016 Words  | 3 Pages

    Bentham, an act utilitarian, created a measurement called hedonic calculus that calculates if an action is wrong or right by determining factors like intensity and duration of pleasure. Singer strains on the importance of the act by the number of people affected from it. He believes that every human being is equal. Therefore, geographical and emotional closeness is irrelevant to moral responsibilities. He states that “death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad” and that if you disagree “read no further” because it would be hard to convince anyone otherwise (P. 231 Singer). He argues that if we can prevent bad things from occurring without “sacrificing anything of moral importance” it’s our moral obligation to act on it (P.231 Singer). What is not clear is as to how much we should give, as we should keep in mind that not everyone in the world gives aid to famine relief so we must take that into account. Singer then tries to make it easier on us by stating that instead of negotiating something of comparable ethical significance in his second premise, it can be of any moral significance. He also believes that if one is to ignore a duty to aid others then he or she is no different than an individual who acts wrong. This is because he believes that it is our moral responsibility to do good deeds and people dying is wrong

    Read More

  • Taking a Closer Look at The Salem Witch Trials

    900 Words  | 2 Pages

    This form of accusing holds zero form of justice. The accusers weren’t even able to explain what happened themselves, so instead of worrying about t...

    Read More

  • Greek Hospitality in the Odyssey

    948 Words  | 2 Pages

    Altogether, hospitality was an important theme for Odysseus, during his adventure back to Ithica. Hospitality also played an important role for Telemachus, and the search for information about the whereabouts of his father. Without this tradition of Greek hospitality, the sequence of events in The Odyssey could have changed drastically. Not only was this Greek custom of hospitality important in The Odyssey, it was also important to Greek citizens. Just the simple tradition of hospitality, whether positive or negative, can explain much about Greek citizens, and how they treat each other.

    Read More

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

    1021 Words  | 3 Pages

    To describe Peter Singer’s main argument for why we have an obligation to help people in need, I will

    Read More

  • The History of the Salem Witchcraft Trials

    2587 Words  | 6 Pages

    During the time of the Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692, more than twenty people died an innocent death. All of those innocent people were accused of one thing, witchcraft. During 1692, in the small town of Salem, Massachusetts many terrible events happened. A group of Puritans lived in Salem during this time. They had come from England, where they were prosecuted because of their religious beliefs. They chose to come live in America and choose their own way to live. They were very strict people, who did not like to act different from others. They were also very simple people who devoted most of their lives to God. Men hunted for food and were ministers. Women worked at home doing chores like sewing, cooking, cleaning, and making clothes. The Puritans were also very superstitious. They believed that the devil would cause people to do bad things on earth by using the people who worshiped him. Witches sent out their specters and harmed others. Puritans believed by putting heavy chains on a witch, that it would hold down their specter. Puritans also believed that by hanging a witch, all the people the witch cast a spell on would be healed. Hysteria took over the town and caused them to believe that their neighbors were practicing witchcraft. If there was a wind storm and a fence was knocked down, people believed that their neighbors used witchcraft to do it. Everyone from ordinary people to the governor’s wife was accused of witchcraft. Even a pregnant woman and the most perfect puritan woman were accused. No one in the small town was safe. As one can see, the chaotic Salem Witchcraft Trials of 1692 were caused by superstition, the strict puritan lifestyle, religious beliefs, and hysteria.

    Read More

  • Peter Singer's Argument in Famine, Affluence and Morality

    1493 Words  | 3 Pages

    Singer presents his argument specifically in terms of famine relief and, although it has broader applicability, the discussion mostly falls under this specific topic. Thus, he conforms his argument around aspects relevant to famine and/or poverty when laying out his three core premises.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Jan Narveson Vs Peter Singer

    1135 Words  | 3 Pages

    In his article, the author Peter Singer presents valid points within his work in a way that provokes one to question their morals and ethics. He rationalizes the gift of donation in an unconventional but motivating manor. The purpose of “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” is to encourage people to reevaluate his or her ability to contribute to the underprivileged people of the world. Singer is addressing this article to any person with the ability to donate. The author makes it clear that nearly everyone has the ability to make a difference is others lives. Additionally, in “The Singer Solution to World Poverty”, the author explain that we have a duty to give, but he is not stating whether it is a duty of justice in Narveson’s sense. He is not stating if would be morally correct for anyone to force us or impose to us to give to the needy. This author is trying to persuade or convince people to give voluntarily. The author is not enforcing to do something, this is contrary to Narveson’s position “enforced fee”. “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” addresses the urgency for a more generous world. Peter Singer presents valid points within his work in a way that provokes one to question their morals and ethics. He rationalizes the gift of donation in an unconventional but motivating manor. The main purpose of “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” is to

    Read More

  • Peter Singer's Paper 'Famine, Affluence and Morality'

    1498 Words  | 3 Pages

    Singer starts with the base of assumption that suffering and death from lack of the essentials of food, water, shelter, and proper medical assistance are bad. I find no problem with accepting this assumption as it is consistent with most widely accepted moral theories. Singer continues by stating “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it”(Singer, Pg.231). Like his first statement, this one is easy to swallow. No moral code, save for maybe ethical egoism or nihilism, would attempt to refute either of his premises. His final conclusion is that if it is in our power to stop suffering and death from lack of the essentials, without sacrificing anything of comparable moral worth, we are morally obligated to do so. This essentially removes the current definition of charity, making giving money to famine relief, not a supererogatory act, but a moral duty of all people who have the ability to do so. Singer admits that this would drastically change the way people live their lives. Instead of living with any disposable income, people would be giving money to those who are living under bad or unsurvivable conditions. But wi...

    Read More

  • The Trials Of The Salem Witch Trials

    1060 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Salem Witch Trials took place in the summer and into the fall of the year 1692, and during this dark time of American history, over 200 people had been accused of witchcraft and put in jail. Twenty of these accused were executed; nineteen of them were found guilty and were put to death by hanging. One refused to plead guilty, so the villagers tortured him by pressing him with large stones until he died. The Salem Witch Trials was an infamous, scary time period in American history that exhibited the amount of fear people had of the devil and the supernatural; the people of this time period accused, arrested, and executed many innocent people because of this fear, and there are several theories as to why the trials happened (Brooks).

    Read More

  • The Salem Witch Trials

    2023 Words  | 5 Pages

    During the early winter of 1692 two young girls became inexplicably ill and started having fits of convulsion, screaming, and hallucinations. Unable to find any medical reason for their condition the village doctor declared that there must be supernatural forces of witchcraft at work. This began an outbreak of hysteria that would result in the arrest of over one hundred-fifty people and execution of twenty women and men. The madness continued for over four months.

    Read More

  • Morality of Giving

    1069 Words  | 3 Pages

    Singer's argument appears to be mainly an appeal to logos, in his argument he reasons why he thinks it is morally required of people to give for famine relief and other needs. However, his argument relies heavily on pathos as well. The main thrust of his argument is this “If I am walking past a shallow pond and see a child dro...

    Read More

  • Famine Relief

    1822 Words  | 4 Pages

    Famine, Affluence, and Morality; Singer suggested, “we should prevent bad occurrences unless, to do so, we had to sacrifice something morally significant” (C&M, 827). However, different philosophers and writers have criticized his view and the general idea to help the poor.

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay On Death Penalty

    2435 Words  | 5 Pages

    Many people, including some higher educated people, tend to believe that executing someone is a lot cheaper than the alternative, which is life in prison without the possibility of parole. Indeed, this thought seems like common sense. However, extensive research has been conducted that contradicts that belief. For instance, a study conducted in Maryland, in 2008, found that the state spends roughly 1.9 million dollars more per capital case, compared to non-capital cases (Warden, 2009). But how can this be some may ask. Well, the reason capital punishment costs more than life without the possibility of parole, is because death penalty cases are longer and more expensive. Because the capital punishment is an irreversible sentence, the state, or government, is required to heighten the defendant’s due process in order to decrease the chance of the defendant being innocent (DPIC). Furthermore, not only is it more expensive for the trial phase, it is also a higher price for a state to imprison death row inmates compared to other

    Read More

  • Comparing Kant And Singer's Claim On Poverty

    1457 Words  | 3 Pages

    Also the strengths, and weaknesses that came along with his argument. First the claim against Singer’s argument, how one person can't aid three billion people on their own, so it would barely make any change if that one person helped. A claim for his argument is what if God put you in the spot that the starving, suffering people are in? You would definitely want assistance from the people that have more fortuity in wealthier nations. I sided with Singer for the reasoning that we are letting people die, that could be living right now. I believe that these people deserve to be conserved. If they receive money, they could feed their families, and maybe put forward enough money to start saving for an education. Everyone deserves to have opportunity, and these people in these suffering nations simply don't have it. What is happening to these people is a moral sin, and a

    Read More

  • Peter Singer and Moral Decisions

    761 Words  | 2 Pages

    Singer explains the reasoning beg=hind his thesis by offering the reader a thought experiment from Unger’s book called “Living high and letting die”. In the experiment a scenario is presented where a child is on a train track and a train is headed towards him and is surely going to kill shim. Now, a man named Bob has the opportunity to save the child. In order to do so he would have to divert the train by throwing a switch. But by doing so he would also wreck his prized and expensive Bugatti. The car is also an investment for his future. Singer correctly assumes that most of the people would condemn Bob for not sacrificing a material object in order to save a life. Singer claims that though Bob is not responsible for putting the child in harms ways. He is nonetheless responsible for the child's death if he refuses to act. Being a utilitarian philosopher he tends to see the consequence of the actions as the criteria by which to judge an act as moral or not. Here the action, or rather the non-action, of Bob leads to the death of the child. In Singer's book, there is no intrinsic difference between being directly responsible for a situation and failing to prevent the situation from happening. However, Singer only uses this thought experiment to draw parallels between the Bob case and the spending habits of a modern consumer in an affluent country. He claims that "Bob's situation resembles that of people able but unwilling to donate....” Furthermore, he argues that there is no moral difference between the two scenarios. Hence, by Singer's argument, splurging on luxuries and not donating to charities is an immoral act. Having already condemned Bob's decision to not save the child's life the reader is left with no option but to accept P...

    Read More

More about Famine, Affluence, and Morality

Open Document