April 1, 2013
Instructor Galen Johnson
Peter Singer- Famine, Affluence, and Morality
Who is Peter Singer? Peter Singer was a man with many beliefs and thoughts about what he feels and what he thinks things ought to be. The argument "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" by Peter Singer suggests that “the agent which is praiseworthy for giving to charity but not blameworthy for not giving to charity is wrong, and the agent which does not give to charity should be blameworthy instead, establishing charity as a duty” (www.helium.com 2013). In writing this paper my intent is to explain Singer’s goal in this article, and then present his argument in relation to this issue. Explain three counter-arguments to Singer’s position that he addresses in his article, and then indicate Singer’s responses to those counter-arguments. To define Singer’s concept of marginal utility and identify how it relates to his argument. Compare how the ideas of duty and charity change in Singer’s proposed world? Present my response, to Singer. Famine, Affluence, and Morality “is an essay written by Peter Singer in 1971 and published in Philosophy and Public Affairs in 1972. It argues that affluent persons are morally obligated to donate far more resources to humanitarian causes than is considered normal in Western cultures. The essay was inspired by the starvation of Bangladesh Liberation War refugees, and uses their situation as an example, although Singer's argument is general in scope. The essay is anthologized widely as an example of Western ethical thinking” (wikipedia.org 2013). In reviewing this article I find that Singer was concerned with the wellbeing of others when it comes to food, shelter, and medical care, and the lack of these things that are essential to our daily activities. He went on to argue that “moral attitudes are shaped by the needs of society, and no doubt society needs people who...