Peter Singer relies on two main principles that help him establish his conclusion. The first principle state …show more content…
There is no doubt that the money being sent will help people in need, but no matter how much we can try it can be nearly impossible to end world poverty. Even if we do send surplus money to needy countries, we will ultimately have to continue doing this for the rest of our lives. In the long run, with the continuous amount of donations that an individual can send may lead to a serious case of depression. The leisure activities that we are accustomed to do for personal enjoyment are key to the happiness that we want to have in life. People work in order to have a happy lifestyle by enjoying the money they work so hard for. Nonetheless, it is important to consider Singer’s response to this objection.
One important objection to my thesis is that there are counterexamples to my argument in which the premises are true but the conclusion is false. Consider a case such as that one person’s happiness is no better than saving many people’s live. Singer argument brings forth is that most Americans could save the life of a child by making a donation of several hundred dollars to a charitable organization. Singer’s argument, however, may have made some readers emotional and shamed.