Famine, Affluence, and Morality by Peter Singer
Peter Singer's article is intended to provoke thought on the issue of the more fortunate's moral obligation toward the less fortunate. Singer argues that people who live in affluent countries must radically change their way of life and their conception of morality so that they will become committed to helping those in need. From Singer's point of view charity is a moral obligation; one has a duty to assist those who are suffering from starvation, lack of shelter, and/or inadequate medical care. In other words, charity is not an arbitrary act of kindness that one may perform or not, depending upon the wind, without reflecting on one's morality. Giving to famine relief should be thought of as a duty, as wrong not to do, as a moral requirement.
Peter Singer Explication of Peter Singer\'s \"Famine,
This paper examines Peter Singer's argument that citizens of the developed world have a moral obligation to provide aid to the suffering people of the developing world. After explaining Singer's basic argument, the paper explains counterarguments to Singer's argument and how he would respond, and concludes with a personal response.
Famine, Affluence, Morality Peter Singer\'s Principle Goal
Singer's conception of morality and his unconventional notions of charity and duty seem to be correct as propagated in Famine Affluence and Morality. Moreover, the author's usage of the Bengali case study during 1971 is exemplary in proving his point. I support the author's notions, and offer a variety of reasons why.
Singer's arguments on famine, affluence, and moral obligation
This paper is an analysis of utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer's seminal 1972 essay "Famine, affluence, and morality." In this essay, Singer argues that we have a moral obligation to give as much charity as we can to alleviate suffering like famine, even if this means denying ourselves small, personal luxuries.