ipl-logo

Singer's Sustainability Argument Analysis

723 Words3 Pages

As you know, in the last couple of months I have been working on the wrongness of killing and the replaceability argument.

After some thought, I decided I will accept the utilitarian arguments against killing (although this is clearly one of the weakest points of utilitarianism) and just focus on the replaceability argument, as it is the primary topic of my thesis.

At first, I began to focus on Singer 's treatment of infanticide and the killing of animals. Both are considered replaceable, but, I believe, there are some inconsistencies. However, I have come to the conclusion that these are not major, and therefore, I will not use them as my main focus of interest.

Instead, it may be productive to focus on the assumptions the argument makes. As I see it, Singer makes three primary assumptions, two axiological and one metaphysical. The axiological ones are: (1) death, at least in the case of non-persons, does not have negative value; and (2) coming into existence is, if the life is worth living, a positive thing. The metaphysical one is the total view (3). That is, the position that we should take into account the interests of potential non-existent people as well as existent people.

(When I say …show more content…

First, it is what I believe. And I fear my thesis will lose strength if I do not make my full case against the replaceability argument. Secondly, I believe philosophers have a duty to defend controversial arguments, when these are justified and coherent with the rest of a theory. Thirdly, as far as I have seen, no one has taken that route to counter the replaceability argument (maybe for good reasons), so at least it will be an original approach. And finally, it will only be one of the chapters in my thesis, and even if it is not accepted, the other claims in my thesis, regarding the badness of death and animals ' cognitive abilities, will still stand as they can be separated from the antinatalist

Show More
Related

  • Peter Singer Argument

    151 Words  | 1 Pages

    I would have to disagree with Singer assumption that we are all trained to believe that death is always portrayed with a negative connotation, if anything many people believe that death is not the end. Whether we become angels, spirits, or reincarnations many people want have a positive perspective when they will eventually perish. Of course one could argue that beliefs like these exist in part due to the fear of death itself and expecting that we continue existing in some fashion offers provides some relief.    In regards to the question, people here have already given answers that would I agree with, assuming that Mrs. Bennett wasn't embellishing her story in order to frame both her and her husband in a optimistic light, I also can believe

    Read More

  • Singers, Practical Ethics Summary

    1180 Words  | 5 Pages

    The debate on when it is appropriate to killing anything has been dissected by many, however a correct conclusion can never be made. In Singers, Practical Ethics, chapter 1-4, he dissects the word “human being” into two definitions. Then he compares the two definitions in past occurrences and in analogies, in which he addresses the controversial topic of, the differences in killing a human and a person. His final position is incorrect and this essay will explain to as why his premises and conclusion is wrong and how to improve it.

    Read More

  • Article Analysis: The Singer Solution By Peter Singer

    725 Words  | 3 Pages

    In his article, The Singer Solution, Peter Singer argues that citizens of affluent nations are failing to do their moral duty, which is to donate far more to charity than they actually do. The article starts by referring to the Brazilian film Central Station where a miserable retired schoolteacher named Dora is faced with a choice. She could pocket an impressive $1000, but she must first convince a homeless 9 year old to follow her to a certain location where she is told he would be adopted. After spending the $1000 on a new TV, Dora learns that the boy would actually be killed and his organs sold. Dora decides to get the boy back, but what if Dora decided to look the other way after learning of the boy’s fate?

    Read More

  • Singer Solution To World Poverty Argument

    1292 Words  | 6 Pages

    While pointing out that it is much easier to ignore an appeal for money to help those you’ll never meet than to consign a child to death, Singer uses his utilitarian philosophy to deflect the argument, stating that “if the upshot of the American’s failure to donate the money is that one more kid dies… then it is, in some sense, just as bad as selling the kid to the organ peddlers.” This argument, however, can only be made while using false dilemmas. Singer also addresses a large criticism of his work, that one can’t decide moral issues by taking opinion polls. The argument to this reiterates how the audience would feel being in these situations. This argument is poor as it does not address how the entire article is based on how everyone feels about this particular subject.

    Read More

  • Analysis: The Singer Solution To World Poverty

    794 Words  | 4 Pages

    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?

    Read More

  • Harman's Arguments Against Killing Animals

    497 Words  | 2 Pages

    According to Elizabeth Harman, an action that kills an animal even painlessly, is an action that harms the animal. If we indeed have strong moral reasons against causing pain to animals, Harman argues we must also have strong moral reasons against killing animals. This raises an objection to the Surprising Claim, which states that we have strong reasons against causing intense pain to animals, but only weak reasons against killing animals. The First View claims that killing an animal deprives it of a positive benefit (future life) but does not harm the animal.

    Read More

  • The Singer Solution To World Poverty Analysis

    1805 Words  | 8 Pages

    In this paper I will be arguing against Peter Singer’s views on poverty, which he expresses in his paper “The Singer Solution to World Poverty”. Singer argues that all people with wealth surplus to their essential needs are morally obligated to prevent the suffering of those in dire situations. I will argue that you can not hold people morally obligated to prevent the suffering of others, and that people can only be held morally obligated to prevent suffering that they themselves caused. To begin, we will look at Singers beliefs and arguments regarding poverty and the responsibility of people to help those in need. Singer’s first arguments revolves around a girl named Dora, who is a retired schoolteacher, who is barely making a living writing

    Read More

  • The Singer Solution To World Poverty Rhetorical Analysis

    1078 Words  | 5 Pages

    Making the World a Better Place Poverty is the state of being extremely poor. Most people face poverty once they have children and start to live on their own. In “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift he presents a solution to mothers who are poor and cannot consume enough for the children. However, Peter Singer's view in “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” is to create the best outcome for those who are poor. To solve the world's problems everyone needs to help each other, stop being selfish, children to not be disturb, and adults to have same job opportunities, however others oppose saying the best way to solve world poverty problems would be to feed the wealthy with the poor.

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of The Singer Solution To World Poverty

    1699 Words  | 7 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Why Is Marquis's Arguments Of Euthanasia Is Wrong?

    368 Words  | 2 Pages

    He begins with comparing pro-life and pro-choice arguments, commenting that they are largely similar and have comparable issues. Marquis points out many fallacies both parties fall subject to, such as Feinberg and Quinlan. He also accuses them of making accidental generalizations. A few pages in, Marquis begins his own analysis on these arguments.

    Read More

  • William Craig Critical Analysis

    1393 Words  | 6 Pages

    Existential Issues: William Craig mentioned that even Russel admitted that moral values can never be based on our personal taste and our decisions and he further said, "The point is that if there is no God, then objective right and wrong cannot exist" (Craig). I agree with him because God guides us to the path that leads to success and betterment of many people including ourselves. If we do not have faith in God then there's nothing that could go right since there would be no purpose and no fear of punishment or greed and passion for the reward that can make us follow what's right and wrong in life. “'If life ends at the grave, then we have no ultimate purpose for living'' (Craig). I'd say I agree with him to some extent because many of us

    Read More

  • Sealand's Philosophy In The Chrysalids

    191 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Chrysalids: Do you agree the Sealand’s philosophy Is it ever justified to kill a human being? During the novel The Chrysalids Joseph Strorm was able to sterilize and destroy deviants, and was considered a genocide. The Sealand only killed for the greater good of the species, to save the species from annihilation. The reasons why I agree with the Sealand’s philosophy are that the species must change, and the human race must evolve.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Singer Solution To World Poverty

    576 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Singer Solution to World Poverty Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics, wrote an article featured in The New York Times Magazine. “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” which explored Singer’s idea of taking all money which is not being used for necessities, from people across the world. This idea would, as Singer purpose, is supposedly supposed to solve the World’s poverty issue. However with an issue this complex, a solution is not always going to black and white, thus it is important to weigh the pros and cons before rejecting or endorsing this idea.

    Read More

  • Killing Is Never Justified Research Paper

    847 Words  | 4 Pages

    I disagree with the statement “killing is never justified”. Killing another is never justified in some circumstances, but in other circumstances, killing can be justified. Killing cannot be justified if crime was intentional or was planned beforehand. This is murder because the event was planned and it one person was killed by another. For example, if someone plans to kill someone beforehand, then killing in that case will not be justified because that person did it knowingly.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism And Infanticide Research Paper

    262 Words  | 2 Pages

    Michael Tooley himself said, “Most people would prefer to raise children who do not suffer from gross deformities or severe physical, emotional, or intellectual handicaps. If it could be shown that there is no moral objection to infanticide the happiness of society could be significantly and justifiably increased.” If killing, meant the most happiness for the people, than

    Read More

More about Singer's Sustainability Argument Analysis

Open Document