StudentADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : [ { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “Journal Article”, “ISBN” : “00483915”, “ISSN” : “0048-3915”, “abstract” : “As I write this, in November Ig7I, people are dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter, and medical care. The suffering and death that are occurring there now are not inevitable, not unavoidable in any fatalistic sense of the term. Constant poverty, a cyclone, and a civil war have turned at least nine million people into destitute refu- gees; nevertheless, it is not beyond the capacity of the richer nations to give enough assistance to reduce any further suffering to very small proportions. The decisions and actions of human beings can prevent this kind of suffering. Unfortunately, human beings have not made the necessary decisions. At the individual level, people have, with very few exceptions, not responded to the situation in any significant way. Generally speaking, people have not given large sums to relief funds; they have not written to their parliamentary representatives demand- ing increased government assistance; they have not demonstrated in the streets, held symbolic fasts, or done anything else directed toward providing the refugees with the means to satisfy their essential needs.”, “author” : [ { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Singer”, “given” : “Peter”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } ], “container-title” : “Philosophy & Public Affairs”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “3”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : [ [ “1972” ] ] }, “page” : “229u2013243”, “title” : “Famine, affluence, and morality”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “1” }, “uris” : [ “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=6ef0dfa9-4b18-4ab8-bd6e-2b8762d469f9” ] } ], “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 0 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Singer)’s Name
Professor’s Name
Subject
Date
Famine, Affluence, and Morality
In the article, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer argues that human beings have an obligation to help those who are in need. He criticizes the ordinary way of thinking about the nature of famine, relief, and charity. Additionally, the issue of morality is brought to light in a way that shakes the ordinary way of thinking that is widely accepted by many people. People of affluent especially those in countries like the United States are morally obligated to give more in the form of aid. International aid especially to third world countries ought to be prioritized due to the urgent nature of the matter. He acknowledges that people in affluent countries give donations to third world countries but is quick to point out that they are not enough to cater for the needs of those in need of food and medical care. The purpose of this document is to evaluate the article by giving the reasons for concluding in addition to providing a criticism of the article given the points given by Singer.
The first argument given by Singer to support his stance is the fact that it is bad when people die from lack of food, shelter and proper medical care. Whether one should help the suffering is not depended on the closeness between the two parties. Distance does not mean a lot when it comes to the issue of suffering. Distance does not reduce the effects of suffering in any way. The power of influence also comes up at this point. Ones willingness to help those who are in need does not depend on the power of the influence exerted by other individuals on them. The willingness should not go away if in the presence of other people who do nothing about the plight of those who are suffering.
The second principle given by Singer touches on the importance given to morality. If it’s in the power of human beings to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing something that is of more importance regarding the moral obligation then making a choice should not be a hard thing since it does not make one handicapped. He points out on the importance of not sacrificing anything that is morally significant thereby weakening the mandate placed on the helpers. An example given on this principle is the action of helping a child that is drowning where in fact the helper gets wet in the process. This premises on the fact that saving the child is morally significant as compared to the death of the child which would be morally costly in the process. Singer points out that there is a clear difference between what is just and what is obligatory. However, this should not be used as a justification for not donating to charity. The importance morality places on charity require individuals to look further from their society since their needs are as pressing as our own. Additionally, moral codes necessitate that expectations should not be high given the fact that people have their shortcomings that differ from one person to another. One objection to this thesis put across by Singer is that it does not generate happiness. It rather relieves suffering in addition to preventing death. It is the ordinary moral code and not the expectation of many ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : [ { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “Journal Article”, “ISBN” : “00483915”, “ISSN” : “0048-3915”, “abstract” : “As I write this, in November Ig7I, people are dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter, and medical care. The suffering and death that are occurring there now are not inevitable, not unavoidable in any fatalistic sense of the term. Constant poverty, a cyclone, and a civil war have turned at least nine million people into destitute refu- gees; nevertheless, it is not beyond the capacity of the richer nations to give enough assistance to reduce any further suffering to very small proportions. The decisions and actions of human beings can prevent this kind of suffering. Unfortunately, human beings have not made the necessary decisions. At the individual level, people have, with very few exceptions, not responded to the situation in any significant way. Generally speaking, people have not given large sums to relief funds; they have not written to their parliamentary representatives demand- ing increased government assistance; they have not demonstrated in the streets, held symbolic fasts, or done anything else directed toward providing the refugees with the means to satisfy their essential needs.”, “author” : [ { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Singer”, “given” : “Peter”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } ], “container-title” : “Philosophy & Public Affairs”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “3”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : [ [ “1972” ] ] }, “page” : “229u2013243”, “title” : “Famine, affluence, and morality”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “1” }, “uris” : [ “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=6ef0dfa9-4b18-4ab8-bd6e-2b8762d469f9” ] } ], “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 0 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Singer).
Additionally, Singer notes that each person has the power to donate and prevent bad things from happening in the process. He notes that is each person was to contribute a small fraction of what they had to relief then the fraction contributed by one person would be small in the long run. There would be no reason for contributing more than a small amount to charity. This objection is irrelevant based on the fact that not everyone donates what is enough to famine relief given the magnitude of the actual situation. Additionally, since not many people donate to famine relief, it is not enough since a point would not be reached where what is being contributed is equal to that which is needed by the people who are to be helped in the process. Those in need surpass those who are ready to help by far greater magnitude. To fulfill all the needs, they would have to donate more than they should till a point is reached where their level on needs is roughly equal on both sides. This means that it would be better if they did not donate that mush in a way that makes them handicapped regarding the importance that they give to their inner needs and obligations. It would be better is they did not donate as much as they did. He notes that this situation would be achieved if those donating lacked knowledge of other people donating to the famine and medical care at the same time. It would imply that they donated less than they did.
Singer’s analysis conflicts with the prevailing standards upon which the frameworks of charity lie. Charity is beyond duty and the obligatory. In objection to this analysis by singer, it would be prudent if evaluate the importance placed on others. His viewpoint dictates that other individuals should be given priority. It is true that people should donate a lot of their belongings to charity. Having the moral authority to pursue one’s interests is something that is morally significant given the current state of affairs. One should not be working full time to avert famine. I agree with Singer to some extent on the points which would not detract us from autonomy. People have the moral freedom of living their own lives in addition to pursuing their interests to a certain point. The time one dedicates to time and energy and activities of charity should not be high enough to have a great impact on that devoted to life’s most pressing issues. However, morally it is important to devote one’s time to the service of fellow human beings. I agree with him since these pursuits may have a direct impact on others some of which may not be foreseen. It quite contrasts the freedom we would have if we were to follow our intellectual interests which would not have a positive impact on other people with more pressing needs than us. Singer’s main point is weighty given the nature of the lives of people in third world countries. I would question the second principle due to the state of affairs that is rampant in the society. We do not know the results which would come out of people offering help to others due to the distance in between. However, his conclusions are quite correct since they are considered for the best of humanity.
Work Cited
ADDIN Mendeley Bibliography CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Singer, Peter. “Famine, Affluence, and Morality.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 1.3 (1972): 229–243. Web.
