Peter Singer Famine Analysis

In Peter Singer’s article, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Singer argues for the conclusion that those with substantial amounts of wealth are morally obligated to donate their income to help relieve world famine if they are able to do so without a substantial sacrifice. In addressing what consists a substantial sacrifice, Singer offers two forms of his arguments – often viewed as the ‘strong’ version and the ‘weak’ version. I argue that Singer’s argument does not allow for humans to have a sense

In November 1971, Peter Singer composed his essay “Famine, Affluence and Morality” in regards to famine in East Bengal (now East Pakistan). He stated that people were suffering and dying due to lack of food resources, shelter, clothing, and medical assistance. This and many other factors such as civil war, and natural disaster have turned approximately nine million people into insolvent refugees (Singer, 229). Though there seemed to be some institutions and private or public organizations that were

I’m a strong believer in that anyone can make their own choices in life. There is no such thing as “moral obligation” in my books, however there does exist “courtesy” or “kind-heartedness.” Peter Singer’s argument regarding famine, affluence, and morality is, in my opinion, strongly influenced by sympathetic and empathetic feelings based on observations in a still developing country. In a sense, his reasoning is subjective and biased because he seems to focus only on the problem, and not the circumstances

Critical Analysis of Peter Singer’s ‘Famine, Affluence, and Morality’ Article In the article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” by Peter Singer, Singer begins by introducing the situation that is occurring in East Bengal in November 1971. He explains that there are about 9 million people who are dying from lack of food, shelter, and medical care. He states that what is happening in India is only an example of what is happening in several parts of the world today, there are so many people who

now the country of Bangladesh) was undergoing a severe famine, due to rampant poverty, a civil war and frequent cyclones. The lack of overseas help to this impoverished region was probably what triggered Peter Singer to write the article Famine, Affluence and Morality, wherein he claims that world hunger and famine can be prevented and possibly eradicated if everyone in the wealthy nations did their bit to help the sufferers monetarily. Singer further claims that duty and charity should not be as

Peter Singer famine relief argument, demonstrates big moral questions to our old-fashioned notions of giving towards charity. Human beings have a moral obligation to donate more resources to those who are in need. (Singer, p 235). In his argument, Singer uses an analogy of a drowning child, so as to show that it is within the power of the human being to prevent something evil from occurring. Thus, he gives a human being the responsibility of preventing something bad from happening. To explain this

An Analysis of Euthyphro – Plato It is believed that the theological discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro is one of the most famous Socratic discussions. The discussion is focused on what is piety or holiness asked by Socrates. Socrates engages Euthyphro to help him understand what piety is as he admits he does not know, in order to help with his case against him. Socrates attempts to grasp an understanding of this elusive concept and uses logic to understand what holiness

Philosophers, Peter Singer’s and Onora O’Neill’s attempt to draw connection between poverty and moral philosophy and how aid should be directed towards groups in absolute poverty. The aim of this paper is to provide an extensive analysis on the work of both the philosophers’ while outlining some of the limitations each of the theories has. Peter Singer is an Australian philosopher who has written extensively on poverty and social issues. Peter Singer states that “giving to charity” or neither charitable

In this essay, I will investigate and evaluate the philosophical ideas regarding poverty expressed by Peter Singer. In the first section, I will summarise Singer’s views and solutions regarding poverty. Further, I will provide a critical analysis of his arguments. Singer’s argument by analogy, paraphrased from philosopher Peter Unger in The Singer Solution to World Poverty, describes a situation involving an expensive car and a young child sitting on separate forks of a train track. A retired man

In the “Famine, Affluence and Morality” Peter Singer argued that individuals are morally obligated to grant most of their belongings to famines. He puts his argument as following. “suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad. If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without derby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it.” (Singer,454) John Arthur’s objection to this theory is that Singer’s second premise which