1. Singer’s initial principle is as follows, “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it” (866) According to Singer this is means that it one must prevent something bad or avoid cause any more damage events from happening but are not required to promote something good in return. (866) He goes on to explain that this principle only applies when we do not have to sacrifice anything from a moral standpoint that is deemed comparably important.
In addition to, Singer’s qualified version of the principle states , “if it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything morally significant, …show more content…
The moderate version ensures a sense of security while being able to help by only giving the bar minimum.
Signer takes to be the practical moral implication of the qualified principle to be a stronger version which means to reduce oneself to the level of marginal utility and in Singer’s opinion is the more correct principle because without societal expectations we should give as much as we can for the purposing of eliminating bad happenings or …show more content…
I believe that following Singers moderate principle would impact my relationship with family members , friends and my lifestyle because I may give more a certain percentage of my earnings to aid in a relief foundation or help either a family member or friend in need. I believe that though the moderate and strong versions of the principle slightly differ that giving and helping even a small amount I better then not doing anything at all. In my opinion, if we followed Singers principle especially the qualified then we could reconceive society to be more functions and a better economy. I believe that if we followed the qualified version the economy would change because if everyone gave a certain amount of aid then there would be no need for government involvement in situation. However the downside to the principle being applied to the economy would be that if people are donating more money to aid reliefs etc. then there will be less consumerism which can hurt the
In addition to, Singer’s qualified version of the principle states , “if it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything morally significant, …show more content…
The moderate version ensures a sense of security while being able to help by only giving the bar minimum.
Signer takes to be the practical moral implication of the qualified principle to be a stronger version which means to reduce oneself to the level of marginal utility and in Singer’s opinion is the more correct principle because without societal expectations we should give as much as we can for the purposing of eliminating bad happenings or …show more content…
I believe that following Singers moderate principle would impact my relationship with family members , friends and my lifestyle because I may give more a certain percentage of my earnings to aid in a relief foundation or help either a family member or friend in need. I believe that though the moderate and strong versions of the principle slightly differ that giving and helping even a small amount I better then not doing anything at all. In my opinion, if we followed Singers principle especially the qualified then we could reconceive society to be more functions and a better economy. I believe that if we followed the qualified version the economy would change because if everyone gave a certain amount of aid then there would be no need for government involvement in situation. However the downside to the principle being applied to the economy would be that if people are donating more money to aid reliefs etc. then there will be less consumerism which can hurt the