An Analysis Of Famine, Affluence, And Morality By Peter Singer

Peter Singer’s paper “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” analyses the ethical and moral responsibility of those living in relative affluence and their actions pertaining to famine relief in less economically advantaged parts of the world. Singer calls for much greater action, and a cultural shift in priority and attitude towards those suffering, no matter their proximity to the reader. While Singer’s writing is focused specifically on the 1971 Bengali Famine, the ideals proposed are applicable for modern situations as well. Singer begins by outlining the fact that, if willing, first-world nations and their citizens are more than capable of alleviating states of famine in the third-world, but have not provided assistance of a high enough quantity to do so. This, according to Singer, is morally wrong. He postulates that dying from famine is bad, no matter that location or individual, and if one has the ability to …show more content…
This lies in the acceptance of generous acts as supererogatory, and not a moral failing. Singer designates that moral judgement is often placed on those that act contrary to the base cultural norms, and since generosity is above the select standard for a moral base, then not being generous is not seen as an explicit moral failure. To Singer, this should be changed so that what is right to do is also what is good to do on a basic level, so that not doing something good is equivalent to doing something malicious. This stems from the West having access to enough resources to both survive, thrive, and then some. The level in which sacrifice would cause marginal utility is so high comparatively that donating to assist the saving of another life should be considered a moral basis. Western society, according to Singer, has bypassed the monetary use of goods satisfying human needs by leaps and bounds, so much so that the level of wealth is considered