If Singer had presented this stance, his argument would be stronger for he would be acknowledging both sides of the situation and seeking a solution that would accommodate everyone. Sending the $200 or supporting an organization are great ways to help but telling people to not to go out and buy a new television set even though they worked for it may not sit well with many. In this article, Peter Singer examines the moral conscious of mankind, especially Americans, by viewing their habits. In order to do so, he employs the use of short stories to illustrate human tendencies. Although solid, his stance is flawed because he does not acknowledge humans right to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
According to the United Nations, a child dies of hunger every ten seconds. Likewise, millions of people live in poverty and do not know when they will eat again. While the typical American throws away leftover food, children are dying across the world from starvation. To put this into perspective: By the time you have started reading, a child has died of hunger. But who is to blame?
In Singer’s “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” he argues the importance of donation to poor people, which could mean the difference between life and death for children in need. He gives an example for Bob, who has an opportunity to save a child’s life, but he could lose his worthy car. He makes a comparison between people who are capable to donate money to save children lives and people who have no chance to help or donate under certain situation such as Bob. He also encourages people who are in the middle class to donate at a minimum of 200$; 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.
Imagine if you were in a world that the only way for newborns to survive, the mother and father had to have a volunteer to die so the baby could live. Would you want to live in that kind of world? That is the kind of world that is in 2BR02B by Kurt Vonnegut. The theme/ claim of this excerpt, 2BR02B is life isn't always happy and amazing. One piece of evidence to support my claim/theme is, according to 2BR02B, by Kurt Vonnegut, it states, “The law said that no newborn child could survive unless the parents of the child could find someone who would volunteer to die.
The Struggle of Everyday Life In Anna Quindlen’s essay “School’s Out for Summer” she expresses the importance in why we need to end child hunger and the struggles that parents go though to make sure that their child get a good meal that day, even if they don't eat, the child will still get a meal. Child hunger is a problem for everybody in the world we live in today. It's not just in rural african countries, but its also in the “best country” in the world, some people may say, which is United States. The issue is child hunger. Quindlen uses good evidence that backs up the topic of child hunger.
Philosopher Peter Singer is the writer of an essay, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” that discusses famine and the role we, as human beings, have in order to help get rid of famine. Singer gives many different examples of why we should help those in need. One of those examples has to do with a child drowning. In the scenario, he is walking past a pond and sees a child drowning. He believes that saving the child from drowning is his moral obligation.
Finally, we need to fix the rations around the world. In document seven we see a tweet from jessie saying there’s more food in Africa hen there is in Africa. Africa has rations for how much food people get, low ranking people get less food than high ranking people get. This isn’t fair because here are several kids I know who always have leftover food that they throw away. If the government set a worldwide ration per person, we could divide the food
George does not want to rock the boat when it comes to telling others they are right or wrong. George is like most of the individuals in today’s society, he knows he can change something, yet chooses to sit back and let someone dictate for him. Something that should stand out to readers during this text is when Hazel tells George she would have chimes be the noise on Sundays. George immediate responds by saying that the noise not only wouldn’t be loud enough, but it would be as cruel and that in turn made him unequal. What if individuals accept the worse and when offered something better, they believe they don’t deserve it?
Without a good way of speaking to people, a speech-bearer will not get the message across in the desired fashion. America likes to be fed information and likes to hear and feel the passion in others rather than creating less public and unified little passions in themselves. Citizens like to hear their leaders interpretations and feel a sense of grouping from that, therefore most people will not have read the way Obama’s eulogy was written and analyzed it, but watched him read it and felt the rigor in his voice and therefore found a better sense of understanding. Things tend to make more sense to people when conveyed by someone they look to for guidance rather than when broken down themselves. So when President Obama at the end of his speech begins to sing, “Amazing grace how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me; I once was lost, but now I’m found; was blind but now I see.” It is not the paper in front of him belting out those lyrics, nor is it the way he wrote them on the paper that somehow makes them come out of his mouth in song, but it is his connection to the people that makes this melodious decision.
They are so busy worrying about protecting themselves that they even forget about the others. People, especially in Maycomb County, avoid identifying themselves in the other person. However, they are willing to take part in a bigger group in order to not identify themselves within the other person not as an individual, but as a group. Every single person is able to make “moral choices.” Lastly, I conclude by saying that by choosing what seems to be the right choice, might be harder for the ones who lack empathy, but as Baron-Cohen says, “the choice still