Summary Of Famine Affluence And Morality By Peter Singer

Famine, Affluence, and Morality In the article “Famine, Affluence and Morality,” written by a philosopher named Peter Singer, Singer sheds light and brings awareness to the way people in the world that are suffering due to poverty. His main goal is to convince all people that our decisions and actions can prevent other countries from suffering. He first draws the attention of his article to the issue of the famine in Bengal. He uses Bengal as his example because at that time it was present and the size of the situation has gone unnoticed. People are suffering tremendously in Bengal. However, he felt that the decisions and actions of human beings can prevent this kind of suffering but nothing has been done about it. He suggests that people …show more content…
In no way have people all over the world offered any type of assistance. Not enough reliefs funds have been given nor are demands from their government to help change their situation. Singer used the example in his article of how the countries that are rich respond to a disaster, and he proves his point. Since not everyone donates what they should, the people that do donate should give all they can to help, not just the minimum. But in reality, not everyone will give all the money that needs to be given. Peter Singer organizes his arguments in a way that allows a reader to take individual thoughts, adding them together giving a “big picture.” He shares two assumptions in regards to his argument. His first assumption states that “people are dying due to the lack of food, shelter, and medical care.” However, he didn’t give his statement on this view due to him feeling like the issue was uncontroversial. Some would agree or disagree but he hoped that people would feel the way he felt. And for those that disagree, he noted that they should just stop reading. His next point stated “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without hereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral …show more content…
I have always been taught the Golden Rule since a little girl. The golden rule means to treat people the way you would want to be treated and that applies to my religious views about Singer’s thesis. If we suffered we would want to be helped. We would expect someone to pick us up and make things better for us so the same instance should be given to the poor. If our higher being blesses us enough to have then we should be able to help someone in need. If everyone followed Singer’s thesis on famine, affluence and morality, the world could actually be a better place. The world could be filled with more and happiness and peace for everyone. There wouldn’t be any suffering and the world would prosper. All selfish acts would be gone. People would think more of their wants and less needs. We wouldn’t have to worry about people starving or going