Singer\'s Goal Is a Very Noble One.

¶ … Singer's goal is a very noble one. Through his article, Singer is attempting to dispel many of the more common notions of moral obligation and charity. His article attempts to provide the reader with concrete notions of moral obligation as they relate to overall human behavior. He presents various notions such as the need to help others irrespective of proximity or geographic preference. Singer, through his article also provides evidence as to the absurd thinking prevailing in the developed nations regarding charity. I particularly applaud how Singer contrast's man's desire for clothes with the need to preventing starvation. In the article Singer shows how many unnecessarily spend money on items that provide no moral benefit to society, while others in neighboring countries are starving. The goal of this article is for those in the developed nations to rethink how they regard moral obligation and charity. The article's goal is also aimed at dispelling many of the more common though processes of those in the developed nations regarding charity.

In relation to the Bengali refugees, Singer uses his arguments to persuade the reader to provide more relief funds to the area. He argues that it is man's moral obligation to do so. Singer uses a quote from Thomas Aquinas which reads:

"Now, according to the natural order instituted by divine providence, material goods are provided for the satisfaction of human needs. Therefore the division and appropriation of property, which proceeds from human law, must not hinder the satisfaction of man's necessity from such goods. Equally, whatever a man has in superabundance is owed, of natural right, to the poor for their sustenance. So Ambrosius says, and it is also to be found in the Decretum Gratiani: "The bread which you withhold belongs to the hungry; the clothing you shut away, to the naked; and the money you bury in the earth is the redemption and freedom of the penniless."

Singer uses this argument and quote to further justify man's obligation to help those in nations suffering from starvation.

Explain three counter-arguments to Singer's position that he addresses in his article, and then indicate Singer's responses to those counter-arguments.

Singer masterfully dispels many counter- arguments to his theory of moral obligation. The first, and admittedly, most used counter- argument, is that his assertions are too radical. Critics to Singer's theory believe his concepts to be too radical for the general public at large. As such, they assert that any Singer's theory be accepted. They believe the current theories of moral obligation and charity are too entrenched in society. For instance, many individuals condemn those who violate an established moral law. Acts such as murder, theft, and assault are all condemned by society. However, acts that may be morally incorrect but not wrong, are not subject to the same condemnations. Acts such as spending money on a luxury car instead of providing food for those who are starving, is not seen to be morally wrong. Singer counters this argument by asserting that our moral obligations require us to look beyond our immediate boundaries. Singer believes that individuals are influenced primarily by what others around them are doing.

The second counter argument presented in the article is the duty between duty and charity. Singer assets that developed societies should be working as much as possible to prevent as much harm as possible. He believes, morally, that society should be working full time to help relieve the suffering of others. This work should occur unless undue hardship is imposed on those that are working. Critics counter by asserting that providing relief is only a temporary solution. The problem of starvation, they say, will be prevented temporarily, but the underlying problems will still remain. Singer counters this argument by asserting that efforts could go not to prevented starvation solely, but to the joint issue of population growth and starvation. Singer also asserts that because the problem of starvation may continue, it does not absolve the individual from his moral obligation to help.

Singer's third point is arguably the most interesting one. He asserts that philosophers have no credible basis for many of societies more pressing issues. Singer dispels this notion by saying the issue of suffering is one that does not require special expertise of knowledge. He agrees that in many aspects, specialized expertise based on factual information will be warranted. However in universal issues such as hunger and starvation, the facts are beyond dispute. Singer therefore assets that he is competent in this field and should therefore are listened to.

Define Singer's concept of marginal utility and identify how it relates to his argument.

Singer defined marginal utility as the point at which giving another addition dollar of aid would cause more than an additional dollar in distress for the giving individual. As such, Singer believes that individuals should provide enough relief as to not cause undue hardship on himself or his dependents.

Compare how the ideas of duty and charity change in Singer's proposed world?

In Singers world the concept of charity is completely altered. Currently, we believe those who give to be "generous" and "kind hearted." Under Singers concept, these individuals are obligated to provide such contributions. These contributions are therefore not charity but instead the moral obligation of society. Singer also believes that its societies duty to give any excesses to those who are less fortunate. If this does not occur, he believes the society to be wrong both morally and ethically.

Finally, present your personal response to Singer (this should be no more than one page of the entire assignment). Provide an argument in support of Singer's position. Support those positions with as much logical reasoning and factual evidence as possible.

My personal response is in support of many, but not all, of Singer's positions. To begin, I agree with Singers moderate concept of duty and obligation (I disagree with the assertive one). I believe that it is society's obligation to provide assistance to those who have less. This is particularly true, if the resource in question is an item needed for survival. Aspects such as food, clothing, and shelter should all be provided, given that they do not cause undue hardship on those providing the resources. Western philosophy is such, they society gives when it has the desire to do so, not out of moral obligation. As such, we give considerable less than we should otherwise (Cottingham,1996). Through Singer's article, the moral obligations of the west can begin to change. I believe this will ultimately benefit developed nations for reasons not discussed in the article.