self enjoyment: concert tickets‚ iPhones‚ Jordans‚ Pizza ? If you answered “yes” to any of the above‚ then Peter Singer‚ utilitarian moral philosopher‚ would equate your actions to letting “a runaway train hurtle towards an unsuspecting child” (Singer 4). Though the prospect of not donating our extra funds to charities sounds selfish and egocentric. We are not monsters. In a sense‚ Singer is correct. Currently‚ every person who lives in an affluent country has the ability to donate to charity. Yet
Premium United States Poverty Ethics
Peter Singer asserts that utilitarianism implies a moral obligation to be a vegetarian. Utilitarianism holds that the right actions‚ or what we ought to do‚ are those actions that are expected to produce the best overall consequences‚ provide maximum utility‚ happiness or pleasure and minimize pain and suffering. Utilitarians look at the probable consequences of choices and choose their actions based on whatever they believe will produce the most utility or pleasure. Singer claims that if one is
Premium Utilitarianism Ethics Hedonism
November 29‚ 2012 Singer VS. Kant Duty can be defined in numerous ways but what is difficult to know is what our moral obligations are? Immanuel Kant and Peter Singer have attempted to find a more simple‚ rational‚ and supreme rule for what our duty is. Singer makes the distinction between charity and duty. He attempts to show that we‚ in affluent countries such as the United States‚ have a moral obligation to give far more than we actually do in international aid for famine relief‚ disaster
Premium Morality Ethics Immanuel Kant
Professor T. Edwards The Singer Solution to World Poverty In the Singer solution‚ Peter Singer talks about how it is wrong to live in luxury and watch someone else struggle for the basic things to survive. He argues that instead of going out spending money on necessities‚ help someone. He also tries to prove a point where as if you have something valuable to you‚ would you risk savings? Or would you help an innocent person in need? With this study I agree with Singer‚ because in reality no necessity
Free English-language films
that money? According to Peter Singer‚ you don’t really have any choice because you’re “morally obligated” to donate far more resources to famine relief and similar causes than what you currently think is enough‚ but without sacrificing anything of equivalent moral importance. In this paper I will analyze this argument and try to show that Singer’s conclusions are correct‚ yet they are not quite as correct as he believes they are. To do so‚ I will try to show that Singer is wrong to think that we have
Premium Poverty Ethics Wealth
1. In this paper I will argue that Singer is wrong to claim that human suffering and animal suffering should be given equal consideration. He claims that human animals and non-human animals with vertebrae experience pain and suffering in the same way. (41) 2. In “Animal Liberation”‚ Peter Singer argues that human suffering and animal suffering should be given equal consideration. He believes that a lot of our modern practices are speciesist‚ and that they hold our best interest above all else. The
Premium Suffering Mammal Animal rights
of poverty”‚ Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. This fact indicates how poverty is an issue that needs more attention because of it’s significant impact on the people in the world. Peter Singer‚ an Australian humanist and philosopher‚ addresses the dilemma of poverty world-wide in his essay‚ The Singer Solution to Poverty. Singer argues how it is wrong for an individual to live well without giving substantial amounts of money to help people who are hungry‚ malnourished‚ and dying from easily treatable illnesses
Premium Poverty Poverty in the United States Africa
Arguments of Peter Singer PHI200: Mind and Machine Instructor: April 19‚ 2013 Singer’s goal in the article “Famine‚ Affluence and Morality” is to get people to think differently about famine relief‚ charity‚ and morality. These are key issues that people need to be more aware of and act on them. People who are financially stable and well off should take more of an active role by giving more. They should feel obligated in helping those in need. There are many people suffering severely‚
Premium Poverty Wealth
Singer starts out with a metaphor that centers on a woman in South America. The woman sells a child to an adoption agency thinking that the child has a better future there‚ but she soon finds out that the child will die because of her (Singer 60). She decides against returning the money and claiming the child again because she just used the money to purchase a new entertainment system (Singer 60). Singer uses this story for two reasons‚ to tug at those
Premium Philippines Pollution Poverty
Short Paper In “Famine‚ Affluence‚ and Morality” Peter Singer argues the importance of giving to those in need‚ especially as those of us in affluent nations have an overabundance of resources. In this paper‚ I will exposit Singer’s argument and explain the methods and points that he makes. Specially‚ I will show that through his assumptions and implications‚ as well as how he refutes counter arguments Singer starts out his argument by explaining the situation at hand‚ “people are dying in East
Premium Counterargument Objection Argument map