Famine, Affluence, and Morality Essay
PHI 200 Mind and Machine
August 19, 2012
In this article Peter Singer’s goal is to shed light and bring awareness to the way people in the world are suffering due to poverty and natural disasters. He also explains how many people struggle to survive because they live below the poverty line, some on a dollar a day. Singer makes the point that we should be doing more to help those who are not in the position to help themselves. By using Bengal as an example of how richer countries react to a disaster Singer is able to prove his point (Singer, 1972).
Singer addresses the issues of why people do not donate. He says some people have the belief that it is the government’s responsibility to provide aid to …show more content…
Singer use marginal utility as a tool to explain by giving more one would cause oneself and one's dependents as much suffering as one would prevent in Bengal. If everyone does this there will be more than enough in store to benefit of the refugees, and some of the sacrifice will have been unnecessary. In theory if everyone does what they should the result will not be as good as if everyone did a less. Singer’s views most closely follow those of utilitarianism, which is a moral theory according to which welfare is the fundamental human good. This Welfare can be referred to the happiness or well being of individuals (Utilitarianism, 2007).
I agree with Singer’s article, Famine, Affluence, and Morality. I think that it’s our moral responsibility to do more to help other. Charity should be our duty not our just something we do half hearted. I believe that if we possess the power to effect change in the lives of other and we should do so to the best of our ability. Our morally obligated to prevent as least some suffering by personally taking