Lifeboat Ethics Summary

In the article “Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor”, the author Garrett Hardin raised the question that whether the rich countries should help people suffer from poverty. He claimed that the supporting strategies for the developing countries, including the World Food Bank could result in more severe recourse inadequate issue and other disasters. In addition, a large number of immigrants flood in the US could ruin the natural environment and social balance. In that case, the author argued that regardless of the current situation, privileged nations should not provide aid to people trapped within difficulties of the underdeveloped nations. Even though, his

Initially, the author provides two metaphors, the widely accepted spaceship metaphor and his own lifeboat metaphor, explicating why his lifeboat metaphor is more realistic. After that, the author elucidates to his audience how the rate of population growth in poorer countries is much greater than the rate of growth of rich countries, and how with the continuous provided aid, the rate would only continue to increase. Moreover, Hardin mentions the disadvantages of the proposed World Food Bank, and how it is run by selfish companies whose main aim is financial gains. Also, Hardin discusses how the poor countries’ planning is what got them to the stage they are at, and how they negatively affect the environment. Finally, the author debates whether there is a true benefit from immigration to rich countries, and identifies how it negatively affects the growth of the United

At first Hardin’s ethics seem rude and selfish, but as you continue reading he makes it clear this may be the only way to save our world and have it become a better place. For instance, "on the average poor countries undergo a 2.5 percent increase in population each year; rich countries, about 0.8 percent. If the poor countries received no food from the out side, the rate of their population growth […]" (Hardin 4). Hardin continues his piece explaining why rich countries should not help poorer countries that are in need. He believes a poor country that needs support needs to learn the hard way, even if that means losing resources or people. His words like "rich countries", "no food" shows the use of a metaphor that Hardin is able to paint a visual illustration of his argument to his audience. This helps influence and persuade his readers because they are able to grasp the whole concept of Hardin’s argument. Hardin also spoke in his essay using the repetition of the words "we" and "us" is a language factor that persuades the audience to accept Hardin’s ideas because it implicates that he and his audience is of equal status. Here, the ethics he reveals in his essay have good reasoning. Helping someone in need has always been a moral in someone’s life. But now, Hardin proposes a new ethic, "lifeboat ethics". Singer, on the other hand, often refers to the fact that nearly one-third of Americans spend their income on luxuries that they “desire” instead of donating the

In Garrett Hardin’s essay, Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor, Hardin describes the wealthy population of the world as being in a single lifeboat that is almost filled until buckling while the poor population of the world treads water below. Hardin’s essay gets his readers to feel the natural instinct to survive. The lifeboat metaphor that Hardin uses relieves the wealthy population of their moral obligations to the less fortunate, but in addition, puts all of the blame and cause of the depletion of earth’s resources on the poor. As much as his argument may make sense,

While reading Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor by Garrett Hardin, I found myself agreeing with what he had to say throughout most of his essay, for this reason I decided to write about it for my essay. About halfway through I thought that he was very good at presenting his case against helping the poor. Saying that outright sounds cruel and selfish but in the end, it isn't.

Ecologist Garrett Hardin’s excerpt from his original essay, “Lifeboat Ethics: The case against helping the poor” portrays what is the harsh reality in the generation’s economically divided world in 1974. In this figurative excerpt, which first appeared in Psychology Today, Hardin expresses his dislike for the poor people and immigrants of this world by linking the problem to a lifeboat. He goes as far as to imply that their death would be more ethical than allowing them to live and reproduce. While there is some sad truth to what Hardin proclaims, I am not in agreement with his argument. There are limited resources to aid the underprivileged; nevertheless most wealthy nations are perfectly capable of helping any struggling people in need-

Garrett Hardin’s excerpt from “Lifeboat Ethics” first appeared in Psychology Today in September 1974. In this essay, there is a metaphor that rich and poor are very different. I strongly disagree with Hardin’s metaphor even though he is truthful about his beliefs. The metaphor is only being seen in one point of view, when there are multiple ways of looking at it.

In Life Boat Ethics, author Garett Hardin addresses the problem of foreign aid and its dangerous contribution to overpopulation. To prove that foreign aid condones overpopulation, Hardin uses compares rich nations and poor nations to passengers either on the life boat or off the life boat. Survivors on the life boat have limited space and must decide whether or not to allow those swimming on board. Hardin concludes that those on the boat should not allow more people on their boat if they want to survive. Thus society has to stop giving away valuable resources if they want to survive. Hardin goes on to express his discontent on commons, including the idea of a World Food Bank. According to Hardin, A World Food Bank, where countries give and

Lifeboat Ethics is a metaphor for the process of wealth and resource distribution as described by ecologist Garrett Hardin. In 1974, he published an article called, “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against Helping the Poor,” that outlines his reasons that the wealthy nations of the world should not be wholly responsible for supporting the needs of the poor. Donald Kennedy and William Clark both wrote articles in regard to the concept of lifeboat ethics and the tragedy of the commons. In the article, Hardin defines the concept he terms lifeboat ethics and defends his utilitarian approach to the problem of wealth distribution by offering interesting solutions through use of his appeal to reasoning; however, his metaphor finds fault in assuming

What determines the right of life? Who determines who should die or be saved? In the story “The Lifeboat,” written by Rosetta Lee, it is up to the passengers of a sinking ship to determine who can be saved. There are ten passengers aboard the ship but there is only one lifeboat that can hold six people. The other four passengers will surely die.

Garret Hardin is an ecologist who has written numerous articles, including a metaphorical/argumentative writing piece titled “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor”. Hardin uses “Lifeboat Ethics” to capture the reader’s attention on the issues we are dealing with today to either saving the economy, saving yourself, or saving others. He argues the idea against rich nations helping poor nations, giving his audience a visual of how the economy would be affected if the rich would take an unlimited number of poor into the lifeboat. He also ties his argument in ethics exceeding the capacity with the overpopulated world. Hardin argues the negative consequences of helping the poor effectively using logical reasoning and moral ethics; however, he does not use a sufficient amount of evidence to support his main points.

In this essay, Hardin used the lifeboat as a metaphor to describe the world and how the richer countries should not let the poorer ones on. It was interesting to see how harshly he criticized the poor and how

- No! You Cannot Come in Garrett Hardin writes about saving the poor in his essay"Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against the Poor" found in The Blair Reader. Hardin writes about how the rich countries are in the lifeboat and the poor countries are swimming in the ocean. He also writes about how the United States helps other countries. Hardin feels that if the government keeps helping other countries and letting people in then America will also drown. "We must convince them if we wish to save at least part of the world form environmental ruin"(page 765). Why should I help the poor countries? Why should I let the immigrants in? I see no reason for helping someone that

During The Lifeboat written by Rosetta Lee, a ship has crashed in a rough part of the sea, also all but one of the lifeboats have been destroyed. A lifeboat can hold up to six people at a time. Originally, there are ten people who are rushing and wanting to board the boat, but there are only six seats. In the end, four people are going to have to go down with the ship while the other six are sailing away to safety. The list of ten people are: woman who thinks she is six months pregnant, lifeguard, two young newlyweds, senior citizen, elementary school teacher, thirteen year old twins, veteran nurse, and captain of the ship (289-290).

In 1974, Garrett Hardin, an ecologist and philosopher, published the article, "Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor" subsequently, it received critical controversy in regards to world poverty. In 1999, another philosopher, Peter Singer, published another article called, “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” which also discussed the issue of world poverty. Hardin clearly states the deficiency behind helping the poor, while Singer is in total favor of helping the poor. Each author properly stated their claims and utilized strong imagery to support it. Even though Singer supports helping the poor, there is something that he had overlooked, which is mentioned in Hardin’s article, however, there is something they both overlooked that may be the solution to everything.