Summary Of Famine, Affluence And Morality By Peter Singer

Improved Essays
Anyone can agree that lack of food, shelter and medicine could be drastically devastating to an individual or even a community as a whole. In Peter Singer article “Famine, Affluence and Morality” he argues that people who live in affluent countries like the United States have a moral obligation to give back to those who are in need. By giving back to famine relief, disaster relief etc. we must radically change our way of thinking in order to help others. While Singer’s arguments prove that people should do these tasks for the greater good of humanity, he does not form a pragmatic conclusion ensuring that your charitable donations are being broken down within the company correctly. With this being said, the donated money is not being used to …show more content…
People are choosing to not donate to the Bengal Relief Fund because they do not feel they are obligated to do so, since there are many other companies who are trying to convince people to give to their charity, so what makes the Bengal Fund so special? Singer states that if people knew specific numbers of how much to donate it would show the realistic of where the funds are going and what areas they are specifically helping. People are choosing to not take part in this fund even though they are asking for so little. If everyone believed each other and came together to help out, then this Fund would actually be able to take care of the lack of food, shelter, and medical care. Singer constantly states the negatives when it comes to individuals and donating and never states the positives or shows what people have …show more content…
Singer states that geography does not matter and that all people should be able to help around the world no matter the distance. What he does not realize is that people have obligations to their immediate family and communities, which needs to come before helping an individual you are not connected to. I do not believe that my donation to certain charities is comparable to Singer’s view point would be the same as his analogy of the “drowning child”. These don’t compare because when you are donating money to the many people far away, you aren’t able to witness the improvements first hand. As an individual, you expect your money to make a difference to the people in need but in reality, you are repeatedly hearing the commercials about how a poor country continues to live. This does not make you morally guilty because there are many other people who have a healthy life-style that are giving back even when others can’t. Singer believes that all good deeds are considered moral obligations but in other stand-points, good deeds are not mandatory to be a part

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Hence, an individual decision is ideal. Narveson argues that people who fail to give willfully should not be seen as having done any wrong. They must not be forced to give their money to charity and taxation. However, there is a contradiction to Singers argument in “The Singer Solution to World Poverty”. He as a utilitarian has no reason in principle to argue that it is not right to force people to sacrifice for charities.…

    • 562 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Peter Singer ultimately believes that we are morally obligated to help those who need help and are suffering. He provides various arguments that support his belief that everyone should help the dying people of East Bengal. He starts off by assuming one thing, “suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad.” This assumption serves as a foundation for his many claims since it provides a definition for what he considers bad. Furthermore, his first claim is that we are morally obligated to stop bad things from happening only if we do not have to sacrifice something of equal value.…

    • 2138 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Peter Singer Poverty

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Peter Singer argues that most people will think that Bob’s action is unhuman and wrong than he remind us that we also have the opportunities to save children around the world from dying through organization such UNICEF or Oxfam America etc. By comparison, Singers states “…Bob’s situation resembles that of people able but unwilling to donate to oversea aid….”(203) Since the result of Bob not throwing the switch is that the child died, that can be said the same to the people not donating to help poor children results in children dying. In other word, Singers believes that if we think everything is wrong when it is involving children death then it is also wrong for not donating to the charities because it also leads to children’s death. Singer also provides a calculation and information on how much we need to donate in order to save a 2 year-old child.…

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Does that have any meaning, though, if the end result - people’s lives being saved - is the same? Like mentioned prior, some of the people in the world have no other option. Whether it is a morally correct thing for one to donate when considering their motives, is not something that would cross the minds of those who are living in extreme poverty where those around them are dying and they are simply waiting their turn. Singer states that philanthropists such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are donating large sums of money towards solutions to global poverty, not due to motivations of personal divine salvation, but rather more likely out of a sense of duty. So the motivations of those who donate should simply be to better the state of his fellow man, but as well as if there were a government mandated requirement to donate then that would remove the question of if it 's their personal motives or not out of the question…

    • 1149 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Singer failed to consider why people work so hard. While it is in good spirit to give to the needy and homeless, it is also in good spirit to enjoy the fruit of one’s labor. And if the needy and homeless people, who are capable of getting a job and improving their condition, would try better and do what they need to do, then the number of people on the street will reduce…

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Singer contends that we generally have an ethical obligation and duty to help those at risk, and spare them wherever possible. Narveson believes that while it is noble to help another person on the off chance that it bears the little cost to ourselves, this isn't required for us to be…

    • 816 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Singer does not provide criteria to decide on what is morally comparable. Also, I will deny Singer’s conclusion that we are obligated to donate as much as we can to help end poverty. I will argue that donating to charity is supererogatory, which means that donating to charity is not obligated, but instead a positive thing to do. I will also deny his second premise which states that it is our moral responsibility to prevent bad things from happening to other people.…

    • 1246 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In John Stuart Mill’s influential book “Utilitarianism”, Mill introduces the belief that moral action is based upon the concept of utility, or how he explains it, the greatest happiness principle. It is this greatest happiness principle that defines Utilitarianism as the notion that the best moral actions are those that promote the most amount of human happiness. Actions that would be regarded as the least favorable are those that promote the opposite, unhappiness. The concept of Utilitarianism and that of Consequentialism are similar as both judge the moral value of an action dependent on its consequences, however each claim leads to different conclusions.…

    • 1497 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Charity Dbq Essay

    • 1565 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Donating to charity is like kissing a child's finger that got pinched in a drawer. It gives the child the false feeling that their finger is fixed, but in reality nothing changed. An example we see of this is in source B, it says “ Charity helps the recipient with their problem, but it doesn’t fix the cause of that problem. ”(Source B, Para 4). The world needs to fix its problems before it can begin to help those that are suffering.…

    • 1565 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    What Makes the World Go Round Professor of Bioethics, Peter Singer, explains in the article “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” that all prosperous people should give all money that is not needed for basic necessities to places that are in need of food and medicine. As an American, I have knowledge this argument would shake up America as a whole. This could create a world of giving up the Capitalistic ways of America and the economic food chain. On the other hand, it could create a world of kindness and less violence. Can you imagine giving up your freedom to help others?…

    • 1058 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    it’s your moral responsibility to save the child even though there are a lot of people around (Singer, 1972). From this analogy he argues that if everyone would relieve sufferings one way or another, the entire suffering population will be benefited. But, some people look at others and decide not to help. Singer argues that it’s still that person’s moral responsibility to help; now it becomes that one individual must contribute a larger amount due to the greediness of…

    • 1468 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In life we are faced with a series of “big questions”. These questions answer whether we are decently moral people. The ‘big question” we are going to tackle is ‘are we under an obligation to save lives?’ If so, what is required of us to be a morally decent person? In “The Gift” by Parker we learn that Zell Kravinsky would take a utilitarian approach to this question.…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    He does this first by presenting a drowning child situation that attempts to convince people to agree with his main moral principle that people are morally obligated to prevent bad things from happening that would not result in a loss of something of equal moral value. Singer claims that should a person agree that one is morally obligated to save a drowning child with the cost of dirtying their clothes, they therefore must also agree to donate their surplus of money until they themselves are in poverty, because doing so would not risk anything of equal moral value. Contrary to Singer’s argument, one might still be able to agree with his main moral principle without donating all of their money to help prevent poverty. It follows logically this main moral principle is equally applicable to other issues such as the environment, as the degradation of the environment is another bad thing that is preventable to the same extent as poverty. With critical analyzes of Singer’s argument, it may be concluded that one may consistently agree with the initial premises of Singer’s argument without agreement to his conclusion of morally obligatory…

    • 1478 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Peter Singer Argument

    • 1206 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The underlying goal of philosophy is to help humans seek the ultimate truth to the questions that orbit their knowledge for the meaning of existence. One question that many philosophers are challenging themselves to answer would be that of just how far individuals should go in order to provide relief for those who are suffering from poverty. After attaining a degree in bioethics, a professor by the name of Peter Singer recently ventured to provide the world with an answer to the question that had been protruding the minds of many philosophers. Singer claims, “The formula is simple: whatever money you’re spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away.” Although Singer’s argument proposes an idea that could be beneficial towards…

    • 1206 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If Singer was truly attempting to prevent the greatest amount of human suffering for the value of the contributions that he gives to charity, it could potentially be possible that he did not take into account the suffering that he was experiencing in his life due to the heavy financial burden of making large contributions of money. Not having the capability to support yourself but helping others with large contributions can cause suffering for yourself so, the principle to prevent suffering can be used to argue against his other argument on giving money away to prevent suffering. In order to prevent suffering due to the financial burden, the best decision would be to reduce the amount of money being contributed. There have been many cases that different charities have misused money and other contributions. There also have been cases where the money have been used inefficiently.…

    • 815 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays