Food Bank And Moral Model Analysis

Famine is one of the most ongoing prominent problems facing the world currently. Today’s philosophers, Peter Singer and Onora O’Neill approach different methods from the moral code of ethics of Utilitarianism and Kantianism in face of famine. Severe food scarcity causes malnourishment and low stamina with no energy to pursue one’s aspirations of being more than just a statistic. In this paper, I will argue in favor of Onora O’Neill’s Kantian principles of justice and beneficence regarding our obligations during famine and to Peter Singer’s Utilitarian view, which should be considered an incorrect view of obligations to conquer famine.

People in society have been through some kind of distress and suffering once in their lives and it allows for the creation of the drive to help others in their time of difficulty. Hardships are experienced by many in society and cause people to relate to others who encountered similar misfortunes. These understandings bring forth a sense of unity that allows people to produce a sense of compassion to assist others in desperate

People tend to brush off something or ignore something that we do not understand or like. Many Americans do this. So if most of America does this, then what gets done with that problem? Nothing! Barbara Lazear Ascher’s ‘On Compassion’ shows this to a new level. She shows us how the homeless is struggling and everyone turns their heads about it even though it is a big problem in New York City. Ascher’s use of good logos, pathos, and ethos comes together to show people what we are all guilty of at some point in our life. She shows us how the person 's reaction of a homeless person is to how the homeless person reacts to them.

Although I had sufficient meals in morning and evening, I was still hunger during day time. I played tennis on Wednesday. While running on the court, I felt extremely dehydrated and starving. When I hit the ball, I suddenly felt that I was going to fall down because I was shaky and exhausted. I ran to the bathroom and squatted down. I was overwhelmed by my weakness that a sense of insecurity surrounded me. “I am weak”, I told myself, “I can not do this”. I suddenly reflected on my experience in Yemen. I was sitting in the car while I witnessed refugee children knocking on my window and tirelessly begging for food. In their eyes, I saw no anger but fear. All they worried about were the basic need of living: food. Many people, nowadays, fast to lose weight. For them, fasting shows their courage and persistence. They lose the sympathy to the poor who starve to death. However, many poor people, including labors and refugees, have to do heavy manual work for livings. In addition to physical pain, the poor also suffer mentally. For instance, the refugee children are always worrying about their next meals with no sense of secure. They have no hope to their futures. With the experience of working in hunger, I am able to relate my feelings to poor people’s feelings and show empathy toward them.

Where we are is the grand culmination of hundreds of years of cooperating as a species to make for a grander environment that appeals to “all.” Despite our constant effort to improve the quality of life on earth, however, an increasingly tremendous problem pertaining the same subject has been growing “right below our noses”: homelessness. We, the common people, typically place those in such plight into great disregard; push them not off the streets but to the far back of our heads. In the article “On Compassion”, former NEW YORK TIMES columnist, Barbara Ascher, teaches us the ignorance of our denial and the importance of the helpless’ presence, and she does this through the heavy use of contrast, figurative language, a good quantity of rhetorical questions, and some very clever wording. She suggested that the presence of the homeless helps teach us compassion. Afterall, “compassion is not a character trait like a sunny disposition. It must be learned.”

This paper explores Peter Singer’s argument, in Famine, Affluence, and Morality, that we have morally required obligations to those in need. The explanation of his argument and conclusion, if accepted, would dictate changes to our lifestyle as well as our conceptions of duty and charity, and would be particularly demanding of the affluent. In response to the central case presented by Singer, John Kekes offers his version, which he labels the and points out some objections. Revisions of the principle provide some response to the objections, but raise additional problems. Yet, in the end, the revisions provide support for Singer’s basic argument that, in some way, we ought to help those in need.

This textual evidence was then followed by a statement by many interviewed volunteers. These volunteers felt that their work at the soup kitchen was the only thing they participated in that made them feel as though they were doing a good deed. Seeing as how Americans have no concern for the amount of food they waste, and seeing as how Americans rely on the constant need of food as some sort of confidence boost goes to show the reader that there is no actual cure for hunger – because no one truly cares enough to find one.

As a human, I felt obligated to be supportive and help those who need it, if it doesn’t take much to help that person or their benefits aren’t detrimental to me. But after reading On the Supposed Obligation to Relieve Famine, I realized that I should re-evaluate the situation and determine if the individual deserves the assistance. Although I will not settle completely on one side or the other, I have reconsidered my viewpoints, in terms of should I be compelled to help if the person is a good candidate for the assistance. Singer has exposed me to the idea of taking more action in helping those in need, while Kekes has directly convinced me to analyze the situation, the background, the reason for help, and determine if my efforts will be

In the reading, “Feeding the Hungry” by Jan Narveson the author argues that as a human race we are not morally obligated to help out and feed the poor (514). Furthermore, the author defends in this view by discussing a variety of topics and certain examples to defend his view. These topics talk about how people are not morally obligated to help other people. One, of the main points the author tries to argue is that people that are primarily focused around charity do not pay attention to help their lives (512). Another, example the author talks about how when we go to these third-world countries we are destroying their culture and more than likely or not we are not even to really help them. Lastly, the only time the author feels like were morally

Peter Singer’s central idea focuses around how grim death and suffering from lack of food, shelter and medical care really is. He further argues that if we can prevent something this unfortunate from happening, without sacrificing anything morally significant, we ought to do it. In other words, as privileged citizens, we ought to prevent all of the death and suffering that we can from lack of food, shelter and medical care from happening by giving our money and resources to charity (Chao, 2016, in-class discussion). In the terms of this argument, death and suffering from poverty are preventable with the

In the reading, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality", the author argues that people should tend to help others in regards that were all equal in the sense of morality (231). Furthermore, Singer talks about that we can help each through charity, helping people in times of need, and helping through times of emergency. The author’s main reasons to support his or her view are that in times of struggle or life and death we need to help. For an example, the author talks about it is morally wrong for a person not to help a child that is drowning if there is no harm against you (232). Also, the author talks about the negative side of morality that we should not have to help people that are close to us but help people that are extremely far as well in

Speaking about people who are in poverty and in need of food should always raise awareness all around the world. It raises a very major question and issue on why it is still an unresolved problem. Even though there are many great appreciable organizations that help give charity for the people in need, it still is not quite enough considering poverty is still viewed as an issue today. We need to ask ourselves and people who are capable of helping some important questions; what more can we do to help? Are we responsible or obligated towards the people who are in need? Two substantial psychologists had a lot to say about this topic. Peter Singer and Garrett Harding have two different personal views. Peter Singer believes that we the

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

Have you ever wondered where you would rest your head at night? Where you would find your next meal? How would support your family given unforeseen sudden circumstances? I’ve never thought about the importance of these questions until a recent experience I had volunteering at a food pantry. There are organizations whose main purpose is to help those in need and provide resources to members of the community who are going through difficult times. A food pantry is a non-profit community serviced organization that provides members of the community with groceries and resources. From volunteering at this food pantry I learned more than ever to never “judge a book, by its cover”, or in other words, even though I person may look well put together on the outside, you never know what it is they are dealing with on the inside. I’ve encountered homeless members of the community, people who have suffered from physical abuse, and people who have experienced unexpected disasters such as house fires to expected job layoffs while volunteering at a food pantry. I’ve also come to appreciate everything that I have in my life from the roof over my head to the food in my stomach and that some people are less fortunate than me.

Peter Singer said; “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” (Famine, Affluence, and Morality). As human beings, we have a moral compulsion to help other people, despite the verity that they may be strangers, especially when whatever type of aid we may render can in no approach have a more significant consequence on our own life.