In , the young philosopher Peter Singer published Famine, Affluence and Morality, which rapidly became one of the most widely discussed essays in. Outline of PETER SINGER: “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”. Singer’s main argument: 1. Lack of food & shelter & medicine is bad. 2. If it is in. Peter Singer. Abstract. As I write this, in November , people are dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter, and medical caxc. The suffering and death.
|Published (Last):||5 February 2009|
|PDF File Size:||4.41 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.67 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
History of Western Philosophy. Our Faithfulness to moralitty Past Sue Campbell. The small child in the hypothetical example is in front of you whereas those living in severe poverty are generally a long way away. Leibowitz – – Journal of Moral Philosophy 13 5: Henry David Thoreau – unknown. What would you do if you were walking past a shallow pond in which a small child norality drowning?
The two cases are different in psychological terms, though.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality
Through this article, Singer presents his view that we have the same moral obligations to snger far away as we do to those close to us.
Twenty Million Environmental Refugees and Counting. His explicit condemnation of those who fail to accept a duty to eschew new clothes or cars for wnd sake of the poor risks generating resentment.
Daniel Ben-Ami December 4, It argues that affluent persons are morally obligated to donate far more resources to humanitarian causes than is pwter normal in Western cultures. Does Anything Really Matter? The affluent, says Singer, are consistently guilty of failing to recognize this, having large amounts of surplus wealth that they do not use to aid humanitarian projects in developing nations.
Academic Skip to main content. Perhaps its influence is not surprising since, at first sight, its argument seems unimpeachable. The moralkty is that the British government values a supersonic transport more than thirty times as.
If we can help, we must–and any excuse is hypocrisy. On the Supposed Obligation to Relieve Famine. The essay is anthologized widely as an fsmine of Western ethical thinking.
There can be little doubt that the vast majority amd people would wade in to save the child even if it came at the relatively trivial cost of getting their clothes muddy. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Find it on Scholar. Direct relief just a short-term solution. Global Duties in afluence Face of Uncertainty. In fact, Singer is, at least in passing, critical of the forces that do most to eliminate poverty.
World Show more World links.
Outline of Peter Singer on famine, affluence, and morality
People have the ability to transform the world around them for the better, rather then simply lying back helplessly and accepting their fate. Peter Singer on Famine, Affluence, and Morality: One of the core arguments of this essay is that, if one can use one’s wealth to reduce suffering — for example, by aiding famine-relief efforts — without any significant reduction in the well-being of oneself or others, it is immoral not to do so. John Kekes – – Philosophy 77 4: Thompson – – Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 3: Jennifer Lackey – forthcoming – Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.
John Bengson – – Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 3: A Reply to Singer.