As the discussion highlights, the key goal and function of the article are to give the affluent people a reason of optimism and belief so that they can have the moral obligation to the society and donate some of their vast resources so that they can be used for humanitarian causes…
Extract of sample Peter Singer - Famine Affluence, And Morality
That first principle is that death and suffering as result of the shortage of shelter, food, and medical attention are bad. The other principle is that if it is in our power and ability to put to an end these bad things and suffering of the people from occurring, without sacrificing anything of equivalent moral significance, then we ought to honorably do it, as stated by. All these arguments put forward by Singer were to encourage most of the affluent countries to give more of their resources to the unfortunate that they are doing. This would help a great deal in dealing with some of the calamities such as famine and disaster.
One of the counter-arguments presented by is the example of the drowning child, as it is only one person who can help out in that instance. In the case of disaster relief, there is a multitude of people who can help out. Replies to this by claiming that it does not matter morally to the question, how many people could help out, what matters is the ability of individuals to take up the moral obligation responsibility. Failure of anyone to act in a disastrous situation would be the failure of all. Thinking that others could help out, does not in any way, lessen the responsibility. If one person takes on the responsibility, the obligation of the others people lapse.
One of the counter arguments is the example given about the child. The child is in need of help and what ponders is whether the child is the responsibility of the people around or other people around the globe? This is an indication of how the poor people around the globe are spatially distant and far away. Leaving the child without any help could lead to it drowning; however, in many scenarios donating to the relief agencies could help in the preventions of deaths occurring in the future. ...
Cite this document
(“Peter Singer - Famine Affluence, And Morality Assignment”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/english/552930-peter-singer-famine-affluence-and-morality
(Peter Singer - Famine Affluence, And Morality Assignment)
“Peter Singer - Famine Affluence, And Morality Assignment”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/english/552930-peter-singer-famine-affluence-and-morality.
The situation he describes is one that could be told forty years later in the same words and same context, which is to state that little has changed in bridging the gap between the world’s poorest people and the richest societies economically, or even with regard to the most basic aspects of standard of living such as adequate food, shelter, and health care.
In his article, Singer’s primary point is that, if an individual can use his or her wealth to diminish social problems such as poverty without any considerable lessening in his or her welfare others, it would be considered not morally right to do nothing about the problem. In Singer’s point of view, there is a moral evil which affluent individuals.
Even though people are born in different countries and speak different languages, they belong to one race and that is ‘humanity.’ If you have a relative or a friend who is suffering from starvation, then you will definitely help him by providing food as long as you have enough resources.
The article seems to suggest that we are responsible for the woes that have befallen the poor and the refugees in the camps. Peter Singer is therefore suggesting that it should be our responsibility and an obligation to get those entangled in unfortunate circumstances out of it (Singer, 1972).
He has numerous assumptions in his essay, which apparently discusses humanity’s duty to help starving people in countries that need help the most. Among his assumptions include our duty to prevent what is bad, and promote what is good. He elaborates this contention by explaining that if we, humans, have the capacity to help other people who are in need without sacrificing some things that are equally important and significant to our lives, then by all means, we are ought to do so.
In third world countries, adequate services and infrastructure are not readily available. Disaster response is also limited, reducing the countries’ ability to provide for its people. Contributing towards these eventualities is considered charity, which means the voluntary diversion of funds towards such assistance.
Mr. Singer argues that, in no uncertain terms, the world is not doing enough to help those that need it, and in fact those that can help have a moral obligation to do so. Mr. Hardin argues that while help is certainly possible for those that need it, the likelihood of
l can use his or her wealth to diminish social problems such as poverty without any considerable lessening in his or her welfare others, it would be considered not morally right to do nothing about the problem. In Singer’s point of view, there is a moral evil which affluent
In this approach, he goes further to state three major suggestions that would help those in the country to fight the three scourges. Peter Singer argues that the individuals in more advanced and affluent countries have the
As the paper stresses civil wars are mostly caused by political indifferences where different groups support leaders with different ideologies, which cause conflicts. Most people died due to lack of food and shelter for their families as well as the lack of medical care from the kind of dangers they were exposed.
5 Pages(1250 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Assignment on topic Peter Singer - Famine Affluence, And Morality for FREE!