Hardin vs. Swift
Both Garrett Hardins Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor and Jonathan Swifts A Modest Proposal provide arguments of economic in equality religious satire and cultural arrogance. Both Hardin and Swift give arguments of why we are to be our brother’s keeper in a world where population is out of control and greed and self-preservation is a motivating factor.
Hardin describes economic inequality as a population of the world in life boats. The rich and elite have first seating in the rest of the world is left to tread water. The rich, if they were to help save the ones in the water would drown themselves. The analogy of the life boat is that are only so many resources available and the rich have the ability …show more content…
This allow them not to take responsibility for their conditions. Rich countries use and promote birth control to control the population; and therefore, conserving their resources. Hardin talks about “the tragedy of the commons”. This theory states that by stable resource shared by others can be destroyed, depleting the resource period. Meaning, for example, if I have a garden full of squash and grow enough to feed my family, but allow three of my neighbors to pick it and share, but my neighbors take all the seeds and do not replant, I have depleted my resource. Both Swift and Hardin argue the plight of the world’s population control and depleting world resources.
Hardin mentions the wisdom of Joseph in Egypt. He references the storage of the grain for hard times and compares that to the creation of the World Food Bank. It was set up to feed those in need during hard times, economic and natural disaster. The Christian reference the moral standard by Swift and the reference of Hardin that the wealthy countries of the world are to act as Savior to the poor populations. Swift tends to view religious people as hypocrites. The inhuman conditions question the mercy of the church by allowing the cruel conditions of Ireland by its prejudices and
Both Garrett Hardins Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor and Jonathan Swifts A Modest Proposal provide arguments of economic in equality religious satire and cultural arrogance. Both Hardin and Swift give arguments of why we are to be our brother’s keeper in a world where population is out of control and greed and self-preservation is a motivating factor.
Hardin describes economic inequality as a population of the world in life boats. The rich and elite have first seating in the rest of the world is left to tread water. The rich, if they were to help save the ones in the water would drown themselves. The analogy of the life boat is that are only so many resources available and the rich have the ability …show more content…
This allow them not to take responsibility for their conditions. Rich countries use and promote birth control to control the population; and therefore, conserving their resources. Hardin talks about “the tragedy of the commons”. This theory states that by stable resource shared by others can be destroyed, depleting the resource period. Meaning, for example, if I have a garden full of squash and grow enough to feed my family, but allow three of my neighbors to pick it and share, but my neighbors take all the seeds and do not replant, I have depleted my resource. Both Swift and Hardin argue the plight of the world’s population control and depleting world resources.
Hardin mentions the wisdom of Joseph in Egypt. He references the storage of the grain for hard times and compares that to the creation of the World Food Bank. It was set up to feed those in need during hard times, economic and natural disaster. The Christian reference the moral standard by Swift and the reference of Hardin that the wealthy countries of the world are to act as Savior to the poor populations. Swift tends to view religious people as hypocrites. The inhuman conditions question the mercy of the church by allowing the cruel conditions of Ireland by its prejudices and