Ethics Paper Today there are multiple countries struggling with lack of food due to various reasons such as natural disasters, manmade disasters, government policies and individuals actions. In Peter Singer’s article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” we see him focusing on all these aspects and the negative impacts they portray on those in desperate need (Singer, 1972, 229). Singer does this with a utilitarian approach which means he looks at situations as either right or wrong solely on the outcome of choosing one thing over another(Schweickart, 2008, 473). This, therefore, takes into account the interests of others. In his article Singer is arguing that the way people in relatively affluent countries react to a situation like that
So, by allowing everyone to follow their own moral code, it could lead to a chaotic society. If you are upset at someone, you can kill that person without any consequences because your moral code accepts murder. There is no real way to keep people safe in this type of society, and each person is responsible for protecting themselves. While ethical relativism can promote people coming together, it can also encourage people to stay away from one another. Because each person does not know what values and norms another person has, in order to keep oneself safe, it causes people to draw away from others.
Something happens – injustice, a threat to a nation or a criminal act. Why is it that some people take actions against the so-called “wrongdoers” while some others remain silent? Who or what determines whether something is an “ethical” decision/action? I believe these questions eventually boil down to ethical dilemmas, which are a conflict between moral imperatives. According to me, no party can be judged to be absolutely right or wrong in any given situation; it is a lot more subjective.
In the first place, four major arguments are synthesized and presented in standard forms. The first argument is: Premise 1: Lack of food, shelter, and medical care leads to suffering and death of refugees. Hidden Premise: Suffering and death of people are tragedy and undesirable, hence bad. Argument 1(conclusion): Lack of food, shelter, and medical care is bad (Singer, 1972). The second argument is essentially upgraded from Argument 1.
As a result, thousands are starving and becoming malnourished. It will continue if nothing is done. This famine has harmed human beings and has put them under stress. Thus, they have little food and are experiencing many hardships. The food security in Somalia has dropped substantially due to a famine that has caused thousands to die from starvation, if there is no aid given to these malnourished people, the country will break down in security causing people to be defenseless and at risk.
According to him people have no incentive to maintain their health when public money funds health care. He claims that the government should stop interfering in the health care in order to give the people a motivation to maintain their own health. Balko feels that when people will have to pay for their own health, they will have an incentive and will be more responsible for their personal health and well being. Balko has provide various reasons for his central claim that are potent, but he fails to provide enough evidence to buttress his
Thus, since it is impractical to use a rigid moral system, both Weber and Sophocles discuss the importance of responsibility and consequences in decision making. This conception of responsibility and consequences is significant because it differs from a utilitarian quest for “the greater good”. When considering one’s responsibilities, it is inadvisable to cause pain to the individuals that a political leader is responsible for, regardless of the total pleasure it may lead to. In the case of Antigone, Creon’s decision leads to a tragic outcome because he does not take into account the consequences of his actions. His resolve to obstinately stick to his decision is his ultimate downfall.
Peter Singer in his famous paper “Famine, Affluence and Morality” begins with assumptions “The suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad” also he gives his second assumption that “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it”. Singer gives an application of his principle, by ”the drowning child in the pond” case. Imagine you are walking past a pond and you see a little toddler drowning in the shallow pond, you have 2 options now: first- you can pull out he child and save him, however you will ruin your favorite expensive shoes. Or you have a second option of just ignoring the child, but you will not ruin your shoes. We can agree that whoever choses the second option would be considered as a moral monster.
The topic of political correctness in communications deserves to be researched further in depth for many reasons. The first reason as to why political correctness is worthy of a study, is because it in itself has begun to isolate individuals.. While the initial intention of political correctness was to reject derogatory terms in order to create more respect for one another, it has ultimately made society more uncomfortable with people who fit the conditions of these politically charged terms. According to Gallagher (2013), “the effect of political correctness has been to make everyone avoid these topics altogether -- thereby hindering our ability to get comfortable in living and working with those who are different from us.” (para. 6).
However, the fact that determinists also believe that there is no such things as human responsibility makes it difficult for us to accept. The logic may be adequate in the theory, yet it goes against the human disposition to assign blame. The next step would be to deny regret since the individual had no choice in doing what he did. The theory seems to have put the 'human' out of 'human action', leaving humans as some sort of pawns of destiny. Moreover, our 'actions' might also lack our 'doing something' since they are just results of conditions and events (Solomon, 2002).