Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How does hardin propose we solve the population problem
The garret hardin lifeboat metaphor
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Critically examine Hardin’s lifeboat analogy: Garret Hardin’s work, Living on a Lifeboat, is a controversial piece of writing. His callous nature of ethics has won him a large number of critics since it was published in 1974. His renowned lifeboat analogy evokes a range of reactions from readers. Although controversial, Hardin’s line of thought cannot be ignored. I do not agree with all of his reasoning, however, there is no doubting the fact that Hardin tackles issues that must be addressed. Population is a major force affecting famine in the world; I am in full support of Hardin when he urges that this must be addressed. My opinion differs in the fact that I do not believe that foreign aid shouldn’t be given. Hardin’s lifeboats carrying capacities are not as simplistic …show more content…
The wealthy countries cannot afford to ignore the poor. While being in a far better situation in terms of production and consumption, there is no avoiding the fact that there is reliance for resources from the developing nations. This is becoming more and more prominent in the world today. It is not reasonable for wealthy nations to exploit the poor and ‘leave them wading’. Hardin’s analogy, so very callous in nature, provides the solution to the problem is to almost turn a blind eye. There is not doubt his theory provides the human population with an effective solution to population control, we, as the people on the lifeboats are taking the easier option if we resort to these tactics. The analogy brings to light the issue of population far more effectively than any other text I have read and for this Hardin deserves an immense amount of credit. However, until all factors point towards complete and utter devastation, whereby population cannot be controlled, such measures are too drastic. Cassen, R, 1994. Population and Development: Old Debates, New Conclusions, 4 Overseas Development Council, Washington, DC, Hardin, G, 1974. Living on a Lifeboat. BioScience, 24,
In this paper I will examine both Peter Singer’s and Onora O 'Neill 's positions on famine relief. I will argue that O’Neill’s position is more suitable than Singer’s extreme standpoint. First I will, present O’Neill’s argument. I will then present a possible counter-argument to one of my premises. Finally I will show how this counter-argument is fallacious and how O’Neill’s argument in fact goes through.
Later in the essay, Hardin writes about the differences in the population growth between rich and poor nations. Poor nations multiply much more quickly than richer nations. The essay then goes on to explain what the consequences would be of setting of a national food bank. It explains that only the rich nations would be able to contribute to the food bank and the poor nations would only draw. This would only add to the problem of the poor nations as they would have no desire to save of food for themselves since they know they will be taken care of anyways. Giving poor nations food would be bad a...
This article does two things successfully; it raises awareness of an important problem and communicates exactly how the problem will affect the world. Barlow’s argument uses pathos and logos to push her ideals on her audience. However, while her use of appeals stimulates, it fails to finish with a final solution to solve the previously posed problem.
The world is divided into two sections: the rich and the poor, “two thirds of them are desperately poor, and only one third are comparatively rich…” (290) Garrett Hardin uses the “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against Helping the Poor” to illustrate whether the poor should be saved by the
Singer, Peter. “Famine, Affluence, and Morality.” Current Issues and Enduring Questions. 8th ed. Eds. Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008. 7-15. Print.
In Garrett Hardin’s “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against Helping the Poor, Hardin argues that you should not help the poor because there are limited resources and if the poor continue to seek help they will continue to overpopulate, disrespecting all of limits. Hardin supports his argument by using the lifeboat metaphor while trying to convince the rich not to lend a helping hand to the poor. In the lifeboat metaphor Garrett Hardin uses the upper class and the lower class people to give us a visual of how the lifeboat scenario actually works. Along with the lifeboat metaphor, Hardin uses the tragedy of commons, population growth, and the Joseph and Pharaoh biblical story to persuade the readers.When reading “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against
Hardin, G. (1974, September ). Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor. Retrieved fromhttp://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_lifeboat_ethics_case_against_helping_poor.html
Philosophy Public Affairs 32, no. 2 (1995). 4 (2004): 357-383. Singer, Peter; Miller, Richard "“What Duties Do People in Rich Countries Have to Relieve World Poverty”."
Seaman, Donna. "Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, And Why (Book)." Booklist 100.1 (2003): 37. Literary Reference Center. Web. 6 Mar. 2014.
According to Ronald F. White, there are three moral theories that attempt to clear the gray area between good and bad behavior, and truth varies among individuals based on their beliefs (279). Hardin argues based on the teleological ethical theory, claiming that an action is immoral if the negative consequences outweigh the positive consequences (White 280). According to Hardin, rich nations should not assist poor nations because the financial disaster that it will impose upon the wealthy will outweigh the justice and help given to the poor (291). However, there is another moral theory that serves as a counterargument to Hardin’s approach. Deontological theorists could argue that aiding the poor is a moral law that should never be broken, no matter the consequences (White 281). Because Hardin’s argument is based solely on his beliefs and one moral theory, it loses practical validity as it can be argued against from many
The human voyage into life is basically feeble, vulnerable, uncontrollable. Since the crew on a dangerous sea without hope are depicted as "the babes of the sea", it can be inferred that we are likely to be ignorant strangers in the universe. In addition to the danger we face, we have to also overcome the new challenges of the waves in the daily life. These waves are "most wrongfully and barbarously abrupt and tall", requiring "a new leap, and a leap." Therefore, the incessant troubles arising from human conditions often bring about unpredictable crises as "shipwrecks are apropos of nothing." The tiny "open boat", which characters desperately cling to, signifies the weak, helpless, and vulnerable conditions of human life since it is deprived of other protection due to the shipwreck. The "open boat" also accentuates the "open suggestion of hopelessness" amid the wild waves of life. The crew of the boat perceive their precarious fate as "preposterous" and "absurd" so much so that they can feel the "tragic" aspect and "coldness of the water." At this point, the question of why they are forced to be "dragged away" and to "nibble the sacred cheese of life" raises a meaningful issue over life itself. This pessimistic view of life reflects the helpless human condition as well as the limitation of human life.
World poverty is a huge problem and there are no simple solutions. A range of aspects perpetuate poverty in Africa and other parts of the world, with corruption being one of the biggest contributing factors. In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, Peter Singer proposes that affluent members of Western societies should give all their disposable income to those less fortunate because they are morally responsible for those who have less. He believes that people in affluent societies are obligated to ease or eliminate world poverty, although most of these people have not taken part in corrupt acts which have damaged poorer nations. His viewpoint is not ethically satisfying or justifiable.
There are many problems confronting our global food system. One of them is that the food is not distributed fairly or evenly in the world. According “The Last Bite Is The World’s Food System Collapsing?” by Bee Wilson, “we are producing more food—more grain, more meat, more fruits and vegetables—than ever before, more cheaply than ever before” (Wilson, 2008). Here we are, producing more and more affordable food. However, the World Bank recently announced that thirty-three countries are still famine and hungers as the food price are climbing. Wilson stated, “despite the current food crisis, last year’s worldwide grain harvest was colossal, five per cent above the previous year’s” (Wilson, 2008). This statement support that the food is not distributed evenly. The food production actually increased but people are still in hunger and malnutrition. If the food were evenly distributed, this famine problem would’ve been not a problem. Wilson added, “the food economy has created a system in w...
In the past ten years the world population exceeded six billion people with most of the growth occurring in the poorest, least developed countries in the world. The rapidly increasing population and the quickly declining amount of land are relative and the rate at which hunger is increasing rises with each passing year. We cannot afford to continue to expand our world population at such an alarming rate, for already we are suffering the consequences. Hunger has been a problem for our world for thousands of years. But now that we have the technology and knowledge to stamp it out, time is running short.
One of the most complex issues in the world today concerns human population. The number of people living off the earth’s resources and stressing its ecosystem has doubled in just forty years. In 1960 there were 3 billion of us; today there are 6 billion. We have no idea what maximum number of people the earth will support. Therefore, the very first question that comes into people’s mind is that are there enough food for all of us in the future? There is no answer for that. Food shortage has become a serious problem among many countries around the world. There are many different reasons why people are starving all over the world. The lack of economic justice and water shortages are just merely two examples out of them all.