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 out by saying that he then didn’t feel so embarrassed about not donating his kidneys because he had given more than 5,000 dollars to the Against Malaria Foundation as well as other charities. Finally, he said “So if you're feeling bad because you still have two kidneys as well, there's a way for you to get off the hook.” (Singer, 16:57)
I feel that comparison is extremely compelling because it shows that you do not have to donate that much money to save people’s lives. 5,000 dollars could just be a fancy …show more content…
I believe Jensen, would more than likely pick at his argument about how, Otteson feels that income equality is minor when you compare the benefits of capitalism. This quote is from Jensen “We're told that because we are greedy, self-interested animals, an economic system must reward greedy, self-interested behavior if we are to thrive economically.” (Jensen, Anti Capitalism in five minutes or less) Therefore, I feel that Jensen would argue that just because it solves one problem, doesn’t mean it is automatically morally good. Likewise, we should instead find an economic system that solves all the problems and doesn’t create any new ones. Only then can we truly say that an economic system is good for everyone