In The Ted Talk Video What Did Singer Say About Having Two Kidneys: Analysis

1932 Words 8 Pages
Question 1):
a) In the Ted Talk video, what did Singer say about having two kidneys? Do you think that comparison was strong or weak?
He told the audience a story about a letter he received from Chris Croy, saying that he gave away one of his kidneys, to someone in need. This had then started a chain reaction which enabled four people to obtain kidneys. Singer then went on to speak about how he still has two kidneys, because he himself has never donated his organs before. However, Singer then concluded that Chris told him that donating his kidney was not all that amazing because by donating his kidney it extended the life of people that would amount to the same as giving 5,000 dollars to the Against Malaria Foundation. To which Singer pointed
…show more content…
I picked Singer and Jensen, because I believe they have some of the most compelling arguments made in their articles. I believe that Jensen, would argue that given the poor wages and lack of any form of good living standards are considerably bad. He said “If you concentrate wealth in a society, you concentrate power.” (Jensen, Anti-Capitalism in Five Minutes or Less) For instance, when the people in the documentary were trying to get a look at that factory, NIKE put up posters of them dissuading people from speaking with them for fear of losing their job or even their life. This is just a defining point that capitalism enables a society that tries to control others for their own personal gain. Later he said in regards to a counter argument that said it is unrealistic to avoid capitalism, “By that logic, to be realistic is to accept a system that is inhuman, anti-democratic, and unsustainable.” (Jensen, Anti-Capitalism in Five Minutes or Less) This is a perfect example of why this NIKE video was so morally wrong, because it is an inhuman system that seeks to take advantage of …show more content…
Question 6.
a) Honestly, as I sit at a computer in an air-conditioned home, I feel that if I were in their shoes I would not be able to accept their explanations for why they do nothing to help me. Likewise, as they look to us First World people they probably see a glimmer of hope when aid or the peace corps comes through. But at the end of the day, if I was looking back at myself from their shoes I would not understand how they could not help me at all, and even say that Singer is wrong in his analyses of famine.

b) In my opinion first world privilege is real, and I would say that anyone who lives in the USA in the middle and upper class has some form of it. When I look at myself and what I would consider my “problems” are, I do believe that I have it as well. Even so, I feel compelled to say that even with first world privilege, one can still think to do moral actions in their day to day lives. But first they must acknowledge to themselves that they have first world privilege, from the fact that they can easily get up every day and not worry about if there will be food in the fridge or if they even have enough money to make it through the day. Overall, I feel that even with first world privilege, if you are socially conscience of the world around you, you can be an

Related Documents