Philip Manning 12504697 Q) Evaluate Peter Singer’s argument in ‘Famine, Affluence and Morality’. There can be no doubt that Peter Singer’s argument in ‘Famine, Affluence and Morality’ is unrealistic, unfair and not sustainable. Singer’s arguments are valid arguments but not sound. In order to get a clear and balanced view of my arguments which disprove the Singer article, it is first necessary to examine and lay out the main aspects of Singer’s argument in ‘Famine, Affluence and Morality’. My arguments against Singer’s claims shall then be detailed and examined in depth.
Analysis: The Singer Solution to World Poverty In Peter Singer’s The Singer Solution to World Poverty he discusses the merits of giving up our luxuries in order to help save someone’s life. He has a situation (hypothetical) of Bob who has saved his entire life to buy a Bugatti. He has not insured the car and is taking it for a drive, he parks the car by the end of a rail way track and gets out for a walk. While walking he can see a train coming down the track straight for his car. Now he can throw a switch in order to divert the train away from his car (his pride and joy) but there is a child playing on the train tracks.
In the essay, “What Should a Billionaire Give- and What Should You?” by Peter Singer, he begins by asking, “What is a human life worth?” (Singer 338). He mentions that many people might not want to donate to charity. However, there are some people who agree that the value of a human life is precious. Singer mentions that many people are suffering from poverty. He also details Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, who donate millions away to charities.
What do you do when charitable organizations call you asking for money? Do you donate money to the organization or do you ignore it? Peter Singer would argue that many people ignore it, and in 1999 he wrote the article “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” where he argues “that each one of us with wealth surplus to his or her essential needs should be giving most of it to help people suffering poverty so dire as to be life-threatening.” Singer introduces his article with two exceptionally different examples: a woman who saved a child’s life and a man who killed a child to save his Bugatti. Secondly, he proposes how much money would be required to save a child from starvation, $200, and explains why a majority people do not give even though $200 is not actually that much money. Third, he acknowledges that many people do not believe that they need to give above and over their fair share; he even points out that this also applies to countries with the United States giving .09% when the recommendation is .7%.
Prior to analyzing the direction or quality of an argument it is important to gain a greater understanding of the author. To begin I did a little bit of research to get a grander picture of who Peter Singer is and his ability and credentials to speak on the topic of ethics. From what I gathered in my opinion which could vary from other opinions is that Peter Singer is qualified to speak on the knowledge of ethics. He has studied the topic as well as taught the topic at some of the top schools, Princeton to speak of one and has written several books. It is important to have an understanding of who is behind the scenes to be open to what you are going to read.
One of the main reasons why I side with Singer is the belief that if everyone just gave a little of their pay each month it wouldn 't be asking for a lot(Singer, 1972, 233). Just like we get tax dollars taken out of our paycheck I believe that we should do the same for charities and it would only be a small donation therefore it wouldn 't have a huge impact on your life. Especially when talking about donating to charities that are helping build back communities after natural disasters. I believe that these people didn 't choose this life and therefore shouldn 't have to suffer when we can help. Another reason I agree with Singer is that I truly believe people are greedy and I am guilty of this but to an extent.
In Singer’s “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” he argues the importance of donation to poor people, which could mean the difference between life and death for children in need. He gives an example for Bob, who has an opportunity to save a child’s life, but he could lose his worthy car. He makes a comparison between people who are capable to donate money to save children lives and people who have no chance to help or donate under certain situation such as Bob. He also encourages people who are in the middle class to donate at a minimum of 200$; furthermore, he thinks that people should donate more like 200.000$ when they consider the level of sacrifice that they would demand of Bob’s situation. He gives some estimates for the amount of donations that people should give to overseas.
What do you do when charitable organizations call you asking for money? Do you donate money to the organization or do you ignore it? In 1999 Peter Singer wrote the article The Singer Solution to World Poverty where he argues “that each one of us with wealth surplus to his or her essential needs should be giving most of it to help people suffering poverty so dire as to be life-threatening.” Singer does this by introducing his article with two very different examples: a woman who saved a child’s life and a man who killed a child to save his Bugatti. Secondly, he proposes how much money would be required to save a child from starvation, $200, and explains why more people do not give even though in the grand scheme of things $200 is not that much money. Third, he acknowledges that it would be counterproductive to ask people to give to much, especially when many do not believe that they need to give more than their fair share; he even points out that this also applies to countries with the United States giving .09% when the
Paul Washer delivers a dire appeal to the Christian pastors and church leaders that have been believing and teaching a false gospel. He lists ten indictments against the modern Church system in America. His first indictment, that he explained, was about the denial of the sufficiency of scripture. Paul told the audience about how the social sciences have taken precedent over the Bible and have become a primary influence in the churches. He questioned, if the Bible is sufficient or do we have to bring in every so called social science and cultural study in order to know how to run a church?