Famine, Affluence, And Morality By Peter Singer Essay

1027 Words Nov 13th, 2014 null Page
In his essay, Peter Singer argues that humans have the skills and resources necessary to end suffering in the world. He says that to do this we are each morally obligated to give as much as we are able without negative consequences on ourselves. He also states that in order for this to be achieved as a moral code, our structure of society must be changed. In this paper, I will argue that Peter Singer adequately presents his argument. I will also raise an objection to his argument and state his refutation of that objection. The objection raised is that charity and duty are separated by a line in our society which conflicts with Peter Singer’s argument. In the essay “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Peter Singer addresses the idea that people are morally obligated to give as much as they possibly can if they have the power to do so. They are to do this without causing a significant harm to themselves in the process. He first talks about the famine in East Bengal that was going on as he wrote the essay. He outlines the situation and states that humans have the necessary materials to end the suffering in East Bengal, but they do not always use those materials. He states that India has to choose whether to give money to famine relief or development of the country, which will only lead to more hunger. He then says that this situation is nothing unique and there are similar situations all over the world, but is used as a situation that many people could connect with. His main…

Related Documents