Famine, Affluence and Morality in Singer’s philosophy
With the development of the economy and technology, different countries around the world have been connected as a whole, referred to as the “global village”. During the last two decades, an increasing amount of capital flow, the appearance of multinational companies and cooperation between various regions all have implied the arrival of globalization. It is certain that there are great advantages to globalization. On one hand, globalization encourages free trade between countries, which can further foster working opportunities, for example. [1] On the other hand, globalization has increased the suffering of people living in poor countries, which seems to be an inevitable trend. This essay will challenge Singer’s argument that supports aiding poor faraway …show more content…
But, what if somebody does not give 5 dollars but 4 dollars due to personal reasons? Is that still enough to cover the cost of famine in those poor countries? [5] if not, it is hard to judge that whether the one who gives 4 dollars is responsible for that, which depends on how big the potential loss he creates. Think about the opposite case: one person gives 5 dollars instead of 4 dollars, but the total amount of donation exceeds the necessary amount. So, is the sacrifice he made worthwhile? [5] If he gives only 4 dollars, the total utility will be higher while keeping others’ utility unchanged. But the truth is that no one knows exactly whether others fulfill their obligations or not. If one of them does not obey the rule, none of the rest people has an incentive to give 5
With the development of the economy and technology, different countries around the world have been connected as a whole, referred to as the “global village”. During the last two decades, an increasing amount of capital flow, the appearance of multinational companies and cooperation between various regions all have implied the arrival of globalization. It is certain that there are great advantages to globalization. On one hand, globalization encourages free trade between countries, which can further foster working opportunities, for example. [1] On the other hand, globalization has increased the suffering of people living in poor countries, which seems to be an inevitable trend. This essay will challenge Singer’s argument that supports aiding poor faraway …show more content…
But, what if somebody does not give 5 dollars but 4 dollars due to personal reasons? Is that still enough to cover the cost of famine in those poor countries? [5] if not, it is hard to judge that whether the one who gives 4 dollars is responsible for that, which depends on how big the potential loss he creates. Think about the opposite case: one person gives 5 dollars instead of 4 dollars, but the total amount of donation exceeds the necessary amount. So, is the sacrifice he made worthwhile? [5] If he gives only 4 dollars, the total utility will be higher while keeping others’ utility unchanged. But the truth is that no one knows exactly whether others fulfill their obligations or not. If one of them does not obey the rule, none of the rest people has an incentive to give 5