Famine, Affluence, and Morality Essay

In a piece by Peter Singer entitled, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Singer argues that Americans should prevent atrocious situations to arise but, we also should not sacrifice something of equal importance while doing so. Moreover, in the piece by John Arthur, “World Hunger and Moral Obligation: The Case Against Singer,” Arthur disagrees with Singer; he believes that we should help the poverty-stricken but, it is not morally imperative to do so.

     With Singer’s second assumption, it could seem at first that it attempts to make the reader feel guilty. But if we choose to look closer, we can see its “flaws.” Singer gives us two suggestions that make his assumption even more complex to deal with; he gives us the flaws. His first argument says, “The principle takes no account of proximity or distance” (231). He is trying to imply that an excuse claiming that the sufferers are too far away to be able to help is an unacceptable excuse. Our world has become so much more technologically advanced in so many different ways, it has made possible to communication with the other side of the planet. Singer refers to it as a “global village,” it then reminds me how connected we can be to other areas of the world, therefore making me question why people can’t use that “global village” to help others out. Why do so many people leave new technology unrecognized, ignoring the chance to save someone? I often find myself getting caught up

     Irish-American. To some, this term merely designates one of the many ethnic groups which can be found in the United States; but to those who are Irish-American, it represents a people who faced a disaster of mammoth proportions and who managed to survive at great cost. The Great Hunger of 1845 changed, or more often, destroyed the lives of millions of Irish, causing them to seek refuge from poverty and starvation in other, more prosperous countries. However, not all countries would accept these victims of the Potato Famine. After an immense burst of Irish immigration to Great Britain, the British Parliament began to

Many individuals suffer daily from famine, to destructible natural disasters. While millions live in poverty around the world. In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” by Peter Singer, he emphasizes on utilitarianism for being his main moral theory he accepts. However he doesn’t directly state it in his own writing. According to utilitarianism, they believe that the purpose of morality is to make life better by increasing the amount of good things in the world and reducing the bad things such as unhappiness and pain. This is relevant to Singer since he states, “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.” Meaning a person has an obligation to do whatever it takes to prevent any bad from happening.

Singer’s arguments rest on the simple assumption that suffering, from lack of basic resources, is bad. Accordingly, his argument is that the way people in prosperous countries respond to situations like that in Bengal is not morally justified. His argument is that if we have the power to prevent bad situations from occurring, “without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance,” (Singer, 231) then we have a moral obligation to do so. In order to get people to give the appropriate amount of money Singer insinuates that the social distinction between duty and charity must be reconsidered. Moreover, charity should no longer be seen as a supererogatory act, or rather an act that is socially perceived as virtuous but has no social consequences if ignored. Thus, his

Peter Singer is often regarded as one of the most productive and influential philosophers of modern times. He is well-known for his discussions of the acute social, economic, and political issues, including poverty and famines. In his “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, Singer (1972) discusses the problem of poverty and hunger, as well as the way this problem is treated in the developed world. Singer believes that charity is inseparable from morality, and no distinction can be drawn between charity and duty. The philosopher offers possible objections to his proposition and relevant arguments to justify his viewpoint. The modern world does not support Singer’s view, treating charity as a voluntary activity, an act of generosity that needs

Nowadays, the process of globalization strengthens the connections between numerous countries across the world, and enables people living in developed countries to help those who are experiencing famine, deaths and diseases in poor countries. However, the moral necessity of doing so has been controversial in human’s society for years. One philosopher named Peter Singer gives his opinion in the article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, and presents a powerful argument supporting his claim. In this essay, I will explain his conclusion and main argument, propose one objection to his argument, and evaluate the validity of my objection by considering possible response that Peter Singer would make to my objection.

In 2010, about 46.2 million people were considered poor. The nation’s poverty rate rose to 15.1 percent, whereas in 2009, 14.3 percent of people in America were living in poverty (Censky, 2011). That is an increase of 2.6 million people in 2010. In the United States, the federal poverty line – an absolute measure of annual income – is frequently used to determine who is categorized as poor (Ferris & Stein, 2008, 2010). Currently the government defines the poverty line as an income of $11,139 for an individual and $22,314 for a family of four (Censky, 2011). In sociology, poverty can be defined using two terms – relative deprivation and absolute deprivation. Relative deprivation is a comparison between people and social class. With

Imagine that you and your next door neighbor were going to run a foot race. Then, your neighbor's friend holds you stationery until your neighbor has completed a great portion of the race. Finally, your neighbor's friend releases you so that you may complete in the race. Sprinting vigorously and freely, it would be nearly impossible to win. Could you win or at minimum, could you be any type of competition? This analogy is equivalent to the governmental position taken in the 1960's particularly 1968—the year that the Civil Right's Act was enacted. But, why mention the Civil Right's Act, everyone is equal now right? Wrong! The act was a success on paper, but failed to do the most important thing, and that is to give people in poverty

American factories can comprise of about up to 1000 workers. If American factories are shut down and moved to other countries, this takes many American people out of work. Companies are now also importing jobs. This is where employers hire people such as immigrants to work less than minimum wage. For that reason, many Americans are stuck with the other minimum wage, and low-paying jobs that barely get them through life. Because of this, many Americans are working full time jobs that are below the Federal poverty line. These types of people are often called the “working poor”. Due to this the working poor have to run to welfare. This affects all Americans because taxpayers are the ones paying for welfare. The more jobs that are taken

Many things can contribute to what you think is morally right or wrong. Religion, for example, may create a barrier on to what extent you do something. Some religions set rules, or guidelines on which they limit what people do. Cultures, as well, contribute to people’s decisions. Many times our values and ethics disagree with different people who hold different

Poverty and inequality exist in every developed culture and often are only patched in order for society to continue upwardly. Poverty and inequality in the United States exists for many reasons; reasons that very from the prospective lens. Interpretive theories in particular ask us to question our reality and its constructs. Interpretive theories require us to looks at the world as a social realm, one that we created and constantly change. Interpretive theories study the relationship between power and the construction of social roles as well as the invisible collection of patterns and habits that make up domination, (Delgado & Stefanic, 2001). Susan Kemp argues that the view of the world is dominated by the experiences of white western

The Irish Potato Famine was a period of starvation, disease and emigration, and was known as one of the biggest tragedies from 1845 to 1847. Many people depended on potato crops to survive; however [comma] the potato crops acquired blight, a disease that caused the potatoes to rot while still in the ground. No good crops could be grown for two years [comma] causing Irish tenant farmers unable to pay rent and was forced off their land causing over 21,000 people to die of starvation. The Irish Potato Famine caused many people to leave Ireland to seek work overseas in areas such as England and America. The Irish Potato Famine had a big impact on the history and the economy of Ireland.

Today they say that we are free, Only to be chained in poverty -- Bob Marley

People are dying every minute because of this terrible disease. No antidotes have been found to eliminate it. Poverty is like an epidemic with no antidote affecting the entire world. It has already killed billions of people, and will continue killing unless we do something to stop it. Have you ever thought what living in poverty is like? Seeing a shocking picture in which people were trying to survive gave me a whole different perspective. That image showed me one of the poorest areas of the planet where people were living under despicable conditions. They were working in sweatshops, collecting garbage and living in broken down huts in order to survive. A polluted river passes across from their humble homes, causing incomparable complication to their lives. I could observe the terrible conditions in which this people are working, fishing and collecting garbage. Not only pollution is shown in this photo, above of the photograph a bridge could be observed. I imagine the noise, and the dust that this little detail brings to their lives. That photograph made me feel angry at politicians because they could do a better job helping the needy. Since they were almost dying, I felt sad for the circumstances they live in. A sense of admiration for the way they are able to survive, gave me the strength to fight against this global scourge. The author of this picture is trying to convey a message, showing us poverty in all its faces and inviting us to be part of his fight against