You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Famine, Affluence, and Morality
Pages 3 (753 words)
Answer A Yes. I agree with Singer’s conclusion that we personally have a moral obligation to help minimize world hunger. There are various reasons for agreeing with Singer. The first reason is the duty towards humanity. Even though the world is divided by national boundaries, ethnicity, culture, language etc., all the people in the world are same on the level of humanity.
The same feeling of caring and helping should be applied to people from all over the world. The second reason for agreeing with Singer is the fact that ‘developed countries’ have resources to help the hungry. I agree with Singer’s point that instead of terming the act of helping famine victim as a ‘charitable act’, it should be termed as ‘moral obligation’ (Singer 236). So much of food is wasted and thrown away by common people. One can easily feed hundreds of starving people with the amount of the left-over food by people in a developed nation. Also, people make choices regarding the food items and quality. This shows that there is more than enough amount of food related items available in a country. Hence, when a country has the storage of food even after feeding its citizens sufficiently, then it becomes amoral obligation of that nation, or people of that nation, to help minimize the world hunger. Instead of wasting food or throwing away the edible parts just because they are not needed for a particular dish, it should be given to people who need it. No sane human being will choose to throw food in waste bin rather than giving it to a person who is starving to death. Hence, I agree with Singer that minimizing world hunger is a moral obligation of human beings. ...
Not exactly what you need?