Justification Of Moral Obligation On The Suffering Of People Close By Than That Of Those Far Away

Decent Essays

What reasons might someone give for caring more about the suffering of people close by than that of those far away? Do these reasons give moral justification for this stance?

The question that will be answered within this essay asks why, if justifiable, someone might give preferential care to the suffering of a collective group what are within closer distance than a collective who may be a large distance away. In this essay, I will offer some reasons for why this might be, and attempt to find reason to justify them with reference to external material which tries to find reason and argument about whether this stance can be morally accepted among applied ethical issues. This essay will be split into two main parts, consisting of two intertwining reasons followed by my reasoning for justification of this moral stance. I will argue that - regardless of moral obligation - I believe that we are more justified to care for people closer by, this will be the primary argument of this essay.

A reason one might give to only helping someone close, with my assumption that ‘close’ means people within the same society or social contract as the person rescuing, is that as agents within this contract, we have negative rights. Negative rights are liberties that one has, meaning that they are not obligated, but freely allowed to do something within reason. We could void these negative rights if we believe they will benefit our society or community, and should be influenced to do so, but

Get Access