Philosopher Peter Singer A Solution To World Poverty Essay

Philosopher Peter Singer proposes a solution to world poverty. Peter is committed to the philosophical position of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory of ethics (i.e. a normative theory of ethics which founds the basis of the evaluation of moral actions upon their consequences); utilitarianism emphasizes the notion of the maximization of utility. The maximization of utility, in the context of utilitarianism, is simply the thesis that one should attempt to achieve the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

According to Singer, “…if it is in one’s power to prevent something bad happening without thereby sacrificing something of comparable moral importance, then one ought to do it” (Rachels 154). Central to this argument is the concept of diminishing marginal utility (Illingworth et al 34). According to this principle, the marginal utility of a good decreases with each additional unit of that good that is acquired. Thus, part of Singer’s reasoning in his argument concerning poverty is that our surplus resources are more beneficial to those in severe need such as the starving poor, as opposed to those who are already moderately well-off (Singer 1979).

To take a thought experiment, suppose I have 800 dollars to spend. I could use this money to buy a computer, or I could use it to save the lives of several starving people. Let us say that I’m already living in a decent house, with nice internal plumbing, air conditioning, and a refrigerator stocked full of food. In this case, it seems that, based upon the principle of diminishing marginal utility, acquiring a computer won’t benefit me substantially. It’s a nice thing to have, but I could do without it. On the other hand, someone who is starving...

... middle of paper ...

...s or rules, what kind of society would it be rational to structure? Clearly, we would want everyone to have certain basic liberties such as freedom of speech; but even more than this, we would clearly want to attempt to make sure that at a bare minimum, everyone’s basic needs are being met. One could argue that if this is the rational way to structure society, then every member of the society ought to sacrifice their luxuries to keep the poor from starving. If this logically follows, it seems then that one can be a contractarian and accept Singer’s argument.

In conclusion then, I have analyzed Singer’s argument concerning world poverty, evaluated the fundamental tenets of Social Contract Theory and the implications of its normative principles, and determined whether there is truly is an inconsistency between being a contractarian and accepting Singer’s arguments.