The Singer Solution To World Poverty

Decent Essays
Peter Singer’s Sep. 05, 1999 article “The Singer Solution To World Poverty” is about a moral judgment to save people lives. Singer’s believes that if we all cooperate to donate money for a non-profit organization like Unicef or Oxfam America would help and save the lives of kids. Because of our ignorance so many kids are dying from easily treatable illnesses but if we cut our luxury expense and donate that money for those organizations, we can save someone’s life. Singer also explains that some people do not have a moral judgment to save other people life. For instance,” when Bob out for a drive his Bugatti, he parks his car on the area that railway close to him and as he walks away he notice that little kid stand on the same direction where

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Singer contends that we generally have an ethical obligation and duty to help those at risk, and spare them wherever possible. Narveson believes that while it is noble to help another person on the off chance that it bears the little cost to ourselves, this isn't required for us to be…

    • 816 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The moral dilemma shown here, is the same one that Singer believes occurs every time an American who already owns a TV chooses to go out and buy a new one. Instead of using this excess money to upgrade their television, they should be donating it to prevent the deaths of kids in need. Even though these two decision both have different factors to them, they both could lead to the same result. Except, in one scenario a kid dies by being sold to an organ peddler, and in the other a child dies of hunger on the street.…

    • 348 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    There are many protestations to Singer’s opinion that; we have moral obligations to contribute for the prevention of poverty. Such efforts to deny our moral obligation to the world’s poor originate from various ethical positions. Two of such objections are as follows: The first objection has consequential logic, however its conclusion is different. It states that by preventing poverty now, it may lead to more suffering in the future, so we should implement a triage policy - providing help according to the urgency of need of care - in order to lessen the usage of resources which inevitably will be need in the future (Campbell et al,…

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Peter Singer identifies the moral problem in society and the lack of individual participation in global affairs. More specifically, a lack of interest and contribution in the plight of the world’s most destitute and unfortunate. In Singer’s argument, he brings up several points in the defense of his position: proximity and quantity of possible contributors. Singer identified his argument as, “If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything of comparable moral significance, we ought, morally, to do it.” Additionally, it is in individuals’ power to prevent bad things from happening.…

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Chenelle Seck Gina Santiago PHIL 101, Section 01 14 November 2014 Choice # 2 Peter Singer is a consequentialist and he states that people from Bengali are dying from circumstances that can be prevented by the decisions and actions of humans as a whole, but “unfortunately, human beings have not made the necessary decisions” (pg.229). According to Singer, if we can prevent something bad from happening, “without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, morally we should do it” (pg.231). The same goes for things we can prevent “without sacrificing anything morally significant” (pg.231). In comparison with those who suffer from lack of food, shelter, and medical care worldwide, Singer uses an example that involves you seeing a child…

    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Peter Singer Famine

    • 1735 Words
    • 7 Pages

    An individual who donates money to a charitable organization, often will not directly see the results of their donation that are given to hungry children on different continents. This affects the obligation that an individual will feel towards the less unfortunate, as they feel less connected and concerned about those suffering many miles away from them. Peter Singer, in his essay “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” criticizes the effects that distances can have on an individual’s charitable donations. Singer argues that just because we can see one individual suffering in front of us does not mean that one “ought to help him rather than another who happens to be further away” (Singer, 405). To Singer, it makes no moral difference whether one decides to help a child in their town or a child in South Sudan.…

    • 1735 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Singer does not provide criteria to decide on what is morally comparable. Also, I will deny Singer’s conclusion that we are obligated to donate as much as we can to help end poverty. I will argue that donating to charity is supererogatory, which means that donating to charity is not obligated, but instead a positive thing to do. I will also deny his second premise which states that it is our moral responsibility to prevent bad things from happening to other people.…

    • 1246 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Singer sets the stage for his argument by his first premise, which he believes most would agree too, that human suffering and death due to a deficiency of food, shelter, and medical aide are bad (231). Secondly, he states that if it is in one’s power to prevent something bad from happening, without having to sacrifice anything of equal moral importance, we morally ought to do it. He implies that…

    • 1497 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    it’s your moral responsibility to save the child even though there are a lot of people around (Singer, 1972). From this analogy he argues that if everyone would relieve sufferings one way or another, the entire suffering population will be benefited. But, some people look at others and decide not to help. Singer argues that it’s still that person’s moral responsibility to help; now it becomes that one individual must contribute a larger amount due to the greediness of…

    • 1468 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    He does this first by presenting a drowning child situation that attempts to convince people to agree with his main moral principle that people are morally obligated to prevent bad things from happening that would not result in a loss of something of equal moral value. Singer claims that should a person agree that one is morally obligated to save a drowning child with the cost of dirtying their clothes, they therefore must also agree to donate their surplus of money until they themselves are in poverty, because doing so would not risk anything of equal moral value. Contrary to Singer’s argument, one might still be able to agree with his main moral principle without donating all of their money to help prevent poverty. It follows logically this main moral principle is equally applicable to other issues such as the environment, as the degradation of the environment is another bad thing that is preventable to the same extent as poverty. With critical analyzes of Singer’s argument, it may be concluded that one may consistently agree with the initial premises of Singer’s argument without agreement to his conclusion of morally obligatory…

    • 1478 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Therefore, consequently utilitarianism does not support not giving to famine relief, validating Singer’s claim that giving to alleviate famine is a moral…

    • 866 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Peter Singer ultimately believes that we are morally obligated to help those who need help and are suffering. He provides various arguments that support his belief that everyone should help the dying people of East Bengal. He starts off by assuming one thing, “suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad.” This assumption serves as a foundation for his many claims since it provides a definition for what he considers bad. Furthermore, his first claim is that we are morally obligated to stop bad things from happening only if we do not have to sacrifice something of equal value.…

    • 2138 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Singer upholds utilitarian principles, believing that it’s our job to prevent bad things from occurring, with the exception of sacrificing something equally important or doing something that could cause more harm. His solution is that people could take a small amount, about one percent, of their income and donate to those in need, eventually offering until the level of marginal utility is reached. Giving would be less damaging to you and more beneficial to those who need it. Schweickart mentions Singer’s other conclusion that the government should be influenced to increase foreign aid, which is said to help the poor and not amuse any “strategic or cultural interests.” Schweickart uses his next section “The Fallacy of Philanthropy” to state a criticism of Singer’s theory.…

    • 893 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Singer argues that if we could save the kid from drowning with little inconvenience, it would be wrong not to save the child. Singer believes this situation is like giving to the poor. Singer states that “if for the cost of a pair of shoes we can contribute to a health program in a developing country that stands a good chance of saving the life of a child, we ought to do so” (Singer 7). If everybody gave a small amount, we would be able to help support developing programs to help poor countries. Singer drowning child argument and Hardin lifeboat argument have overlaps.…

    • 817 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    What is a human life worth? Some may say it is worth millions of dollars no matter what. Others might argue that a human’s worth is dependant on who they are, where they came from and what they can do. In Peter Singer’s Article “What Should a Billionaire Give?” he states that many people would be reluctant to even consider putting a fixed rate. It would be unethical to do so, however, he continues with “If we really had to, most of us would agree that the value of human life would be in the millions.”…

    • 1149 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays