• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Famine, Affluence and Morality - Peter Singer.

Extracts from this document...


Famine, Affluence and Morality - Peter Singer Explain and critically assess Singer's argument for our obligation to relieve suffering in the third world. Why does the argument erode the traditional distinction between duty and charity? How would deontological and utilitarian theories of ethics view Singer's argument? Singer's main contention in Famine, Affluence and Morality, the article under consideration, is that our way of conducting ourselves morally ought to be revised. He thinks that if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything else of moral importance, or without making another bad thing happen, then we have a moral obligation to do it. What Singer means is that each one of us has the power to prevent what is bad and affect the rest of the world, however disparate and remote. Let us say that we are in a situation where we can, and should, prevent something morally bad from happening but we let it pass us by and do not try to prevent it. For Singer, this is not just laziness or cowardice, but moral wrongdoing. We ought morally to prevent it. I agree with Singer's point here; it is true and uncontroversial (although his argument doesn't remain that way when he develops it further). He goes on to say that although everyone in their right mind would agree with this ideal, few people put it into practice by for example helping the people of Bengal. ...read more.


No one would have a job because anyone who might have supplied one is now living at subsistence level, having donated his money to the Bengali people. Also, earned income has a value in a moral sense. When everything else seems unsure, an earned luxury is the certain, concrete assurance of your power to obtain good things. It may also be a reward you pay yourself for goals that you have reached. It offers evidence to your senses that your life is good. As a result, although giving most of your money away to the relief fund might be the right thing to do in Singer's eyes, probably not many people would jump for joy at the idea. Furthermore, since Singer holds to his argument so strongly, I wonder if he actually gives away all of his money apart from that which he needs for basic necessities. If not, maybe he is waiting for the rest of the world to sacrifice harder before he starts to worry about his own hypocrisy. Singer's main point in this article is that "the whole way we look at moral issues - our moral conceptual scheme - needs to be altered, and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society." This is a major argument he is putting forward, and would be true if his basis for this point was valid, which I do not think it is. ...read more.


This is where a consideration of a utilitarian viewpoint might be useful. If you were to give money away, whilst sacrificing some of your wealth-acquired luxuries, to the Bengal Relief Fund, maybe you would make one Bengali less hungry for a week, but you would not make him any less poor. Perhaps you would be happy at the thought of helping someone in a dire situation, and a few Bengalis might be happier but for no longer than a week or so. Also, you would of course be less happy as you would be sacrificing some of your luxuries. To promote the greatest happiness among the greatest number of people, as the utilitarian theory goes, one would have to find a way to satisfy the Bengalis' long term needs. What Bengal needs more than anything else is a regime change which will take care of the country's long term needs. This is best left to governments and politicians rather than individuals. The question of how this idea impinges on the Coalition invasion of Iraq is an interesting one. In conclusion, I think Singer means for the best, although I cannot see how his solution is the best possible one. Help the Bengalis, but not by self-sacrifice. Is Singer's real purpose to use self-sacrifice in order to help the Bengalis, or is it to use the Bengali people as a means to effect self-sacrifice? Self-sacrifice seems to me to be the ends, not the means. We could help Singer to achieve his goal by burning money in a bonfire equally as well as by donating money to Oxfam. By Gabriel Kan ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Ethics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Ethics essays

  1. Christian Aid - A Charity Helping Poverty

    enough to give everyone the four basic - enough food, clean water, shelter and education for a whole year. Christian aid observe its purposes of helping all sorts of people to help themselves so that they will not have to relay themselves on others.

  2. Explain how a Hindu marriage service might guide a couple in their married life?

    The entire world is part of one unified whole. The plants, other animal species, and humans are all part of the ever- changing stream of life, so that in some ways, harming another living thing is the same as harming as yourself, and they believe that it is wrong to be prejudiced against someone else just because of their ethnic origin.

  1. Christian Views on Wealth & poverty

    homes, naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you took care of me, in prison and you visited me." The righteous will then ask, "When, Lord did we ever see you hungry and feed you, thirsty and gave you a drink?

  2. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that pivots around the belief that morality should be ...

    In conclusion, Utilitarianism has many benefits for the majority due to its key principle of 'the greatest good for the greatest number' is ensured when making an ethical decision and on the whole, is beneficial in its simplistic method of making a moral choice.

  1. Discuss critically the claim that Freewill and Determinism are incompatible

    Many people however feel that the human sense of decision making, points towards determinism. They maintain that a human's sense of freedom, the sense of deliberating over our options is only "an illusion of freedom". John Locke (1632-1704) points out that a man who is placed in a locked room,

  2. Should our moral beliefs be based on the utilitarian principle of securing the greatest ...

    Comparing two theories, Kantianism seems to be more rational, where there is a universal law, e.g. people shouldn't lie, and organizations should treat workers well. Utilitarianism on the other hand has no universal law on which morality is bases, therefore each situation is judged individually.

  1. Explain and discuss one critique of the link between religion and morality

    An example of this could be the Catholic ideas that the use of contraception and sex before marriage is morally wrong. In reality a vast number of practising Catholics use contraception or practise sex before marriage and believe that the idea that these acts are sinful is absurd and what is morally wrong is the papal embargo on these actions.

  2. I have raised myself to a state of affluence and some degree of reputation ...

    "About this time I met with an odd Volume of the Spectator...I bought it, read it over and over, and was much delighted with it. I thought the Writing was excellent, and wish'd if possible to imitate it" (546). Franklin proceeds to master the art of writing by meticulously copying

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work