Famine, Affluence and Morality by Peter Singers

929 Words4 Pages
In this essay I will be arguing why a utilitarian could possibly disagree with Peter Singers Argument presented in “Famine, Affluence and Morality.” After reading such an interesting paper I must say as much as I disagreed with Singers viewpoints I almost found it difficult to object them with support. From a utilitarian point of view we are to maximize Happiness by reducing suffering. How can Giving possible make someone unhappy? But as I was thinking a saying came across my mind, “Two steps forward one step back”. The answer was rather simple, the very same thing that brings happiness to us is the same thing that can bring sorrow; Money. I’m not huge on politics, actually I hate politics but an argument such as this can be viewed from…show more content…
Without these investments, they would not be able to donate any money to the causes that they provide funding for. Taking a look at the stance brought about by Singer and the financial defense of such actions by the governments it can be said that two clear sides occur from this argument with each supporting the opposing sides. A good approach to determine whether Singer was right in his evaluation of an individual’s responsibility to other members of their community as well as a government’s responsibility to society is by studying the underlying factors that would more or less govern the potential results of what certain actions may bring. This can be done by setting a choice of two potential paths that a society can take and the results that these two paths are most likely to yield. By doing this, it can be said that the path that leads to the best results will be the better option. Taking a look at the basis of the argument taken by Singer it can be said that from an overall perspective he has a good point and if his plan was to be placed perfectly into action there could be a high chance of success should everyone play their part. This is to say that the effect should take place from the grassroots and make its way up to the top echelons of government. This would mean that a regular individual would begin to take more interest in the plight of refugees and ensuring that they are doing everything in their
Open Document