Present Peter Singer’s argument in his paper “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”. What does he think we ought to do? And why? Read this article to better answer the essay http://philosophyfaculty.ucsd.edu/faculty/rarneson/Singeressayspring1972.pdf
In his paper “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer argues that we have a moral obligation to help those who are suffering from extreme poverty and famine in other parts of the world. He argues that our failure to act in these situations is not only morally wrong, but also a violation of our basic principles of justice and equality.
Singer’s argument is based on the following premises:
Suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad.
Get a Custom-Written Paper Delivered on Time
Our subject-specialist writers craft plagiarism-free, rubric-matched papers from scratch — serving students in Australia, UK, UAE, Kuwait, Canada & USA.
If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, then we ought to do it.
– . donating money to aid organizations, we can prevent suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care, without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance.
Therefore, we ought to donate money to aid organizations.
EssayBishops Writers Are Online Right Now
Thousands of students at universities worldwide submit with confidence using our expert writing service. Human-written, Turnitin-safe, on time.
Singer believes that we have a moral obligation to donate as much money as we can reasonably afford to aid organizations that are working to alleviate extreme poverty and famine in other parts of the world. He argues that this obligation is just as strong as our obligation to help a drowning child, even if the child is right in front of us and the suffering people are far away.
Singer also criticizes the traditional approach to charity, which he calls the “duty of beneficence.” This approach suggests that we have a moral duty to be charitable, but it is not as strong as our duty to respect the rights of others. Singer argues that this approach is flawed because it implies that our moral obligations to others are limited by their proximity to us, which is arbitrary and unfair.
In summary, Singer thinks that we ought to donate as much money as we can reasonably afford to aid organizations that are working to alleviate extreme poverty and famine in other parts of the world. He believes that this obligation is just as strong as our obligation to help a drowning child and that failing to act is a violation of our basic principles of justice and equality.