...Peter Singer provides an argument by analogy by using Bob and his precious Bugatti. This argument by analogy starts when Bob decides to park on the railroad tracks and gets out of his car. Bob, then notices a boy playing in the distance on the other side of the tracks. Suddenly, Bob notices a train headed straight for the child on the tracks. Bob has the opportunity to save the child’s life by pulling the lever that would send the train down the other side of the tracks leading to his precious Bugatti. Instead of destroying his Bugatti, Bob decided not to pull the lever and let the train kill the child just because he wanted to save his precious Bugatti from being destroyed. The big question being asked here is, “Was morally right or wrong...
Words: 646 - Pages: 3
...Famous Thinkers Paper Peter Singer Peter Singer was born on July 6th 1946 in Australia. His family escaped Austria during the World War II from Nazis. Most of his relatives died in Nazi camps because they were Jews. Singer is considered to be one of the most influencing living thinkers however he was also called as the best-known vegetarian, and the most dangerous man in the World. He received death threats because of his beliefs and opinions. As he said in an interview for Policy Innovation, his main aim is to reduce unnecessary suffering in the World (Ethics Matter: A Conversation with Peter Singer, 2011). As Peter Singer stated himself “why I have focused on those issues, because I think, as a utilitarian philosopher rather than an expert in particular issues, I can make a contribution (Ethics Matter: A Conversation with Peter Singer, 2011). Peter Singer is known to be one of the most important supporters of Preference Utilitarianism, which in other words mean: “An action is right if it maximally furthers the interests of those affected by it” (Sloane, 1999, p. 53). Among his most controversial and best-known arguments are linked to the world poverty, animal rights, infanticide, abortion, and euthanasia. As a reason for becoming vegetarian and the notion of argument about animal rights was as Singer states an ordinary lunch with his friend who happened to be vegetarian and he presented to him the issue of factory farming ("Peter Singer '07: Animal Rights", 2011). His...
Words: 1513 - Pages: 7
...Running Head: Peter Singer’s Beliefs 1 In reading his article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Peter Singer gives us a seemingly devastating critiques of our ordinary ways of thinking in regards to famine relief, charity, and morality in general. In the spite of this there are some very few people that have accepted, or at any rate acted on, the conclusions he has reached. In aspect of these facts one could possible say of Singer’s arguments, as Hume said of Berkeley’s arguments for immaterialism, that “ they admit of no answer and produce no conviction.” In which I believe that Singer’s considerations show that people should do what would be considerably more than most people would actually do, people do not establish Singer’s conclusions in their full strength or generality. So Singer’s arguments may admit to partial answers, and possibly once properly qualified may produce some conviction. In the article Singer argues that the people who live in affluent countries must radically change their way of life as well as their conception of morality, so that they will become committed to helping those that are in need. Singer begins by asking us to consider cases of famine, like that in Bengal in 1971, Singer argues that the majority of people have a moral obligation to donate all we can possibly to the famine relief, and seeing that the people were suffering tremendously and either the government nor the individuals was doing anything near what was required to help...
Words: 1376 - Pages: 6
...Singer’s Moral Guilt T PHI 208 January 7, 2013 Peter Singer’s goal in “Famine, Affluence and Morality” was to try and to get people all around the world to realize that they, as human beings, have a moral responsibility to help other human beings in need if they can. He argues that the way we view moral issues and our moral conceptual schemes need to be altered, and in fact the whole way in which our society takes our way of life for granted. Peter Singer’s argument is that “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, 1972). He believes that everyone in similar circumstances as himself should give as much as possible, up to the point that they might also be at risk of poverty themselves. He argues that if everyone in society all across the world did this, that the world would not only solve the Bengal crisis, but would also end world hunger all together. That also by not contributing to helping people suffering from tragedies we are not being morally responsible as a race to our “global village”. Counter points to Peter Singer’s argument that he makes are as follows: First he states that the view that he has taken on the Bengal crisis and world hunger may seem “too drastic a revision of our moral scheme”. (Singer, 1972). That in fact people would not judge other people in the way that he suggests they should, that they would save their judgment...
Words: 1655 - Pages: 7
...In Peter Singer’s paper on “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” he explores the possibilities of each and every American giving up about 2/3 of their income. However, rather than simply talking about his own solution as another theory, he tells the reader in so many words that they are wrong. In this paper, I will argue that Singer fails to establish that we are morally required to give to charity. In Peter Singer’s paper he makes the claim that we ought to give up any surplus money we might have and send it to places like Bengal to prevent people from suffering or dying. However, is this really something we are obligated to do? Peter Singer relies on two main principles that help him establish his conclusion. The first principle state that, “…suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad” and that “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable more importance, we ought, morally, to do it” (605). The first principle is most likely unable to be refuted as almost everyone can agree that suffering and death has nothing to do with good. Now the second principle can be explained by the example Singer gives that if you were in a situation where you were walking past a pond and see a child drowning you ought to pull the child out resulting in wet or muddy clothes, which in no means outweighs the death of a child. In other words, preventing something bad will always compensate ruining a...
Words: 1586 - Pages: 7
... Famine, Affluence, and Morality Peter Singer’s argument deals with what occurred in East Bengal, where in 1971 people would die because of not having food, shelter or medical care. Singer sees this as a devastating way of live and his argument can be identified as people dying from the lack of these objects can be seen as bad. “I begin with the assumption that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad.”(Singer) Singer believes that most people would agree with this argument because people hate seeing other people suffer when something can be done to help the suffering. It just makes me feel as if Singer is saying that every difficult situation can be controlled by having other people take matters in their own hands by helping out. Singer backs up his argument with a statement “If everyone in circumstances like mine gave money to the Bengal Relief Fund, there would be enough to provide food, shelter, and medical care for the refugees.”(Singer) He also was relating this statement to himself when he felt like there is no reason why he should give more money than everyone else. It seems like in these types of situations that people should feel obligated to give money in return to help out countries in need. Examples of this include countries who have dealt with hurricanes or natural disasters. Singer says “Giving money to the Bengal Relief Fund is regarded as an act of charity in our society.”(Singer) With relation to this statement, giving...
Words: 555 - Pages: 3
...Peter Singer – “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Harold N. Johnson PHI 208 Elliott Crozart February 3, 2014 In the article Peter Singer gives a critique of our ordinary ways of thinking about famine relief, charity, and morality in general. With the conclusions he draws from the article, very little action is taken. The fact presented by him answers no questions and presents zero conviction. His main goal or idea is to present you with his arguments and persuade people and the government to help with famine relief in the location he describes in the article. His argument was that the current policies in place that people and the government adhere to are not moral. So his arguments admit of a partial answer, and once properly qualified may produce some conviction. His position is supported by what he recalls as reactions to the famine, he feels more can be done. Counter arguments from the text describes the Bengals as being isolated from civilization, this may be the reason the people in less rural areas and the government cannot seek more suitable aid for them. This may be true, but famine ravages areas of more notoriety and the same result usually happens. Another argument against the article was the fact that many other societies and impoverished people require the same help, so why should one charity be place in front of another? Furthermore another counter of Singers’ argument was that society, people or governments will have to radically change their moral...
Words: 894 - Pages: 4
...Dreams versus Reality In Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” he claims that people should give up until the point that by giving further they would be suffering just as much if not more than those we are attempting to help. However, I will show how he fails to address the risks and moral dilemmas that the resulting transportation of those goods and services would cause. Peter Singer asserts that poverty, famine, disease are bad, and claims that we should give until that point that by giving further we would be suffering just as much if not more than those we would be attempting to help. In his article Peter makes defines this level of giving: “By "without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance" I mean without causing...
Words: 934 - Pages: 4
...solutions. Peter Singer has initiated an argument over the solution to poverty in what he and many others feel is a suitable course of action. Peter’s argument is this “The formula is simple: whatever money you’re spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away”. This would have everyone in the world not in poverty donating one third of all wealth to poverty, as that is the average percentage of money spent on luxuries per the average family or person. The pros of this argument would be equalization of the economy and the curing of poverty. The cons of Peter Singer’s argument are taking...
Words: 1398 - Pages: 6
...Description of the Essay Process I chose to respond to Peter Singer’s arguments from Examined Life: Excursions with Contemporary Thinkers (Taylor, (ed.) 2009), regarding ethics and consumerism. I found his argument to be thought-provoking and relevant in America’s generally consumeristic standard of living. I can relate to his idea that a certain degree of our morality is tied to our choices in spending, and how if we are conscious of others who need aid, we should use the means we have available to help them. Doing so would offer us purpose and fulfillment in ways that frivolous spending does not. I would need to reflect on my personal beliefs, knowledge, and experiences with this subject as well, to identify my biases, and see if I have any credibility on the subject to offer to the discussion....
Words: 1097 - Pages: 5
...Singer begins his article by stressing the famine suffering which is currently taking place in East Bengal. Singer starts his argument by imposing the reader to accept the moral premises which are "that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad," and "that if it is in our power to prevent it from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it" (Singer, Famine pg.599). Singer then goes on to exploit a broad-based approach to his assertion in that "we cannot discriminate against someone merely because he is far away from us" (Singer Famine pg600). Singer emphasizes on the fact that distance is not a reason to fail in doing what is morally right to do. The distance between you and the person in need is not a moral justification to discard their need. Singer also emphasizes on an interesting point in his assertion which implies that two wrongs do not make a right. Singer states, "one feels less guilty about doing nothing if one can point to others, similarly placed, who have also done nothing" (Singer Famine pg600)Singer supports this claim by providing an example of a scenario in which a person witnesses a child drowning. Most people would agree that that person has a duty to save the drowning child. Singer claims that this duty exists because we believe that the drowning of a child is a bad thing. If a person has a duty to save the child because a drowning child is a very bad...
Words: 1511 - Pages: 7
...and Moral Reasoning Christopher Ruth September 1, 2013 When reading the paper by Peter Singer Famine, Affluence and Morality, you are pulled in with the first sentence “People are dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter and medical care.” You are instantly searching your brain on how to fix the problem in East Berlin. As you read further down the page he tells you that it is the” decision and actions of humans beings that can prevent this kind of suffering” The goal of Singer’s Paper is to bring awareness to the hungry in other countries. He also wants to make you aware of what other nations donate to the dying in East Bengal. However, his main point is that the decisions and actions of other countries and humans that are willing to help can prevent this tragedy in East Bengal. Singer’s main argument in the paper is that humans’ suffering from starvation is bad and we could improve the world if we could improve these issues. Singer explains several counter arguments in his essay. The first one is, or moral conceptual scheme the way people in relatively affluent countries react to situation like the one in Bengal. With this first moral conceptual, he is stating that life in our society is being taken for granted and our moral compass needs to be altered. The second moral conceptual is that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care is bad. With this argument is using our moral compass to persuade us to see only the suffering that is going on...
Words: 855 - Pages: 4
...In Peter Singer’s article “Singers Solution to World Poverty” suggest that U.S. citizens give away the majority of their dispensable income in order to end global suffering. Singer uses some extreme methods in order to achieve his goal of getting readers to truly believe in his ideas and change their values and lifestyles. Singer gathers his information and unique capabilities to determine the voice in this article and rewrite the tone being given in the conversation. The author’s main point is that many people spend too much money on food just by wasting time with their lives and instead we have starving countries eating leftovers by these people. The use of this points out that the author believes in moralistic and compassionate values. In addition, Peter Singer loves to judge whether acts could be right or wrong by their course of actions. Singer’s Solution did not seem to evaluate into account the long term effect it may have caused. He may have convinced many people to follow in his choice of actions, but certainly not me. All humans have the right to their mortality when they want to buy a certain item in favor of their exquisite needs. In a hypothetical situation, Singer describes a man named Bob and his love for his uninsured Bugatti. Bob has just used up the greater part of his nest egg on an extremely valuable classic automobile. He loves his car not only because he enjoys driving it around, but also because its value continues to go up. This strategy makes Bob happy...
Words: 1248 - Pages: 5
...Famine, Affluence, and Morality: To Give or Not to Give PHI208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning Instuctor: Noel Sauer October 14, 2013 With his focus on the state of the people in Bengal, India, Peter Singer gives us (in his opinions) the ways in which the inevitable, non-unavoidable death and suffering that is taking place there can be stopped. In his article, Famine, Affluence, and Morality, Singer draws the conclusion that if we not only has individuals, but as a government [as a whole] would do our parts, the suffering of these individuals would greatly be reduced. In this summary report, I will try to point out his arguments for immediate help for this nation and give a personal response of this article and his arguments. In his article, Famine, Affluence, and Morality, Singer’s goal is to get us the people of an affluent countries to understand and accept his conclusion that with help from us from anyone, the people of Bengal, India will survive and our moral ethical duties would be satisfied. From the beginning of this article, Singer tries to paint the picture of what is exactly going on in Bengal. He clearly and simply states "people are all dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter, and medical care" (Singer, 1972). Singer believes and tries to get us to believe that with help from other individuals and countries the people of Bengal will survive. He points out that in order for the nine million “refugees” to live at the very least a year the estimated amount...
Words: 1497 - Pages: 6
...Argument Analysis Two In Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, he is observing how there are many people in our world suffering, and argues what morality says one should do about this. After going into the context of the situations at hand with millions of people living on unsustainable incomes etc., Singer proposes two principles, the strongest one he favors and a weaker one he uses as a backup. He agrees with the idea that morally one should always do whatever would prevent the greatest amount of bad from occurring unless the only way to do so is by doing something also morally wrong. Ultimately, Peter provides examples to prove how realistic and current his argument is, and characterizes the relationship between obligation...
Words: 485 - Pages: 2
