With an overwhelming stream of information floating around us every day, it became very hard to filter and form the right understanding of what is really happening, but what is even harder is to keep proper moral and ethical values. Many famous authors have put their word in such eternal discussion about what is right and what is wrong and Peter Singer is one of them. Singer is a moral theorist, who mainly focuses on spreading ethics in his works. Singer bases key propositions on his own perspective of values; hence, to understand Singer’s points and following arguments we must acknowledge his definitions of ethics and morality. Hahn defines those values as “ethics, also called moral philosophy, is the discipline concerned with what is morally good and bad, right and wrong. The term is also applied to any system or theory of moral values or principles.” (Abboud, A.J., 2008) Ethics is about our way of living and making decisions. …show more content…
Throughout his works, Peter Singer tried to tell us that It doesn’t matter what has happened to people, whether they are seeking asylum or request medical or food assistance we have our duty to assist them. To prevent something similar from happening in future, or to cure current crisis we need to rethink our internal values and decide, what is really important, a pair of new stylish shoes, or a saved life. Because of wrong set priorities, people tend to be selfish when it comes to such things which lead to wrong decisions and later on snowballs to more global problems. “If the circle of ethics really does expand, and a higher ethical consciousness spreads, it will fundamentally change the society in which we live. (Peter Singer,
This paper is going to discuss Ethics and Ethical Theories. It will include an introduction to ethical theories, virtue ethics, and care ethics. There will be sections discussing absolutism versus relativism, consequentialism versus deontological ethics, and lastly, free will versus determinism. It will also include a discussion about the study of morality and identify which of the approaches (Scientific, Philosophical, or Theological/Religious) are closest to my own personal beliefs. There will be a discussion regarding the three sources of ethics
Singer illustrates how when a person is in need or lacking, we should give them a lending hand until they are on their feet. Peter Singer writes about how if one can use their fortune to reduce the suffering of others, without hurting or diminishing the wellbeing of themselves or others, it would be immoral not to do so. The key here would be without diminishing themselves or the wellbeing of others. He states that this duty is equivalent to the saving of a drowning child. He explains how if someone were to see a child drowning in a pond it would be morally wrong to not help the child,
To show that there is little moral relevance between failing to rescue a child at some small cost to yourself, and failing to save a starving child in a faraway country at some similarly small cost I will be exploring an argument proposed by Singer. In doing this I will be looking into his strong and weak principles; how he would apply them and some of the criticisms of his point of view.
As time goes by, ethical and moral issues have been brought up for long periods of time and these issues are recently becoming the rising problem to be discussed in society, business area and daily life. Most of people generally understand that the general meaning of ethics equals to the meaning of moral. However, moral is basically a matter of individual conscience without forcibleness, but ethics are related to social system with forcibleness. The academic definition of ethics is described as a stem of philosophy which raises moral questions and is demonstrated what is the main characteristic of morality and the way in which moral standards are decided (Gray & Webb, 2010).
Singer’s argument to world famine is giving charity is neither charitable nor generosity, but it’s an obligation to give money out and if you don’t, then it’s morally wrong. He states we as individuals have a duty to help reduce poverty and death because of starvation. Singer argues, suffering and death due to the lack of food, is terrible. Hence we have the power to help those group of people. By that, people can cut down the famine and suffering by giving famine relief and in doing so, we as individuals have to give a certain amount of money from our standard of living. This fails to recognize people’s own intrinsic moral values because Singer says we must always make the morally best decision.
In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer claims that “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.” Additionally, Singer believes that distance is no excuse for allowing something bad to happen; thus, we ought to help people on the other side of the world the same way we would help a neighbor – even though we may feel further inclined to help our neighbors. Moreover, Singer states that people should help as much as possible, without putting themselves or their dependents at risk of suffering. Peter Singer is correct in stating that people with the capacity to prevent something bad from occurring should do so; however,
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 his article Rich and Poor, Peter Singer argues that we have a moral obligation to give assistance to people in absolute poverty. He derived this conclusion from three premises. The first states that if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, then we ought to it. The second premise is that absolute poverty is a bad thing. The third premise is that we are able to alleviate some portion of absolute poverty without giving up anything of comparable moral significance. To illustrate the urgency of our duty to assist the poor, he believes that in a case where we happen to walk pass a child drowning in a shallow pond, the vast majority of people would agree that it would be seriously morally wrong to not rescue the child. Connecting this scenario to Singer’s argument, we can say it is seriously morally wrong to not assist the poor because the lives of these people in need are of greater moral importance than the excess income we would otherwise spend on luxury goods. Thus, Singer is correct in saying that we have a moral obligation to assist the poor, and that failing to do so is equally as morally wrong as failing to rescue the drowning child.
Peter Singer, a prominent moral philosopher and public intellectual, has written at length about many ethical issues. He subscribes to utilitarianism, which is the position that the best moral action is that which maximizes the well-being of conscious entities; this view is made apparent through his writings. In his essay What Should a Billionaire Give—and What Should You? Singer presents the idea that although the rich are capable of mitigating extreme poverty, there has been little improvement for the poorest 10 percent of the world’s population. He maintains that all life is equal and, therefore, saving the lives of the poor is a moral imperative for those who can afford to. “We are far from acting in accordance to that belief,”
The issue that is being discussed is the way we spend the money is a form of Ethic, and ethic is more than what we decide is what we know that is right or wrong. The importance of acknowledge what is right or wrong to decide everything in this life. In the video “Peter Singer’s Ethics” the author made a significant questions such as what we should spend our money on? Or how we spend that money?” because ethic is about “the basic choices that we are making our lives and one of those choices of how do we spend our money” (Singer, 2010) “Also, I agree that we all have a limited amount of money to spend, and we all have moral obligations in order to use our money to help
In “Practical Ethics” Peter Singer talks about abortion and euthanasia. He asserts that a potential person does not have the same rights as an actual person. He uses examples of other life that humans destroy before they mature, for example he says “to pull out a sprouting acorn is not the same as cutting down a venerable oak. To drop a fertile egg into a pot of boiling water is very different from doing the same to live chicken.” (p.138)
Ethics and virtue have been a very contentious issue facing society for centuries. Many argue over the merits of various theories, each with its own philosophies and assumptions. It is this argument that has given rise to many popular and followed theories of ethics and virtues. The theories discussed primarily in this document include the virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological theory. Each is very distinct to the others in regards to its principles and assumptions regarding human behavior. Each however, has merit in regards to question of ethics and virtue, and how it should subsequently be valued.
There are a variety of different ethical systems that have developed of the course of millennia. However, even though the subject has been covered so thoroughly, it is still heavily debated. The varieties of ethical systems that are in existence look at various ethical problems from different perspectives and can be applied differently in different circumstances. Because of the subjective aspects to applying ethics, they can be as much an art as they are a science. Ethics are something that must be practiced and really cannot be perfected. In this way, studying ethics is a continual process that does not really stop. This paper will argue that ethics are the most important subject that an individual can pursue.
In our society today, we are mostly challenged by two questions: ‘is it right to do this or that? And ‘how should I be living in society?’(Bessant, 2009). Similar questions were greatly discussed in the history by our ancestors in their philosophical discussions. The most ancient and long-lasting literature on moral principles and ethics were described by Greek philosopher Aristotle. He had an excellent command on various subjects ranging from sciences to mathematics and philosophy. He was also a student of a famous philosopher. His most important study on ethics, personal morality and virtues is ‘The Nicomachean Ethics’, which has been greatly influencing works of literature in ethics and heavily read for centuries, is believed to be
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2017). In simple terms, ethics is the system of what is right and what is wrong. Usage of ethics on daily basis is important to a human being, a person is judged based on his/her behavior, whether it’s reasonable or aimless, ethics help people to have a purpose for their actions. Whether it’s during work or outside in open streets, it’s important to have basic ethical behavior. There are many types of ethical behavior that take place every single day. By being simply honest and kind, gives the other person an idea that you have ethics. This paper will cover