What is the main argument of Peter Singer’s paper famine Affluence and Morality?

What is the main argument of Peter Singer’s paper famine Affluence and Morality?

Famine, Affluence, and Morality is an essay written by Peter Singer in 1971 and published in Philosophy and Public Affairs in 1972. It argues that affluent persons are morally obligated to donate far more resources to humanitarian causes than is considered normal in Western cultures

What is Peter Singer’s main moral principle?

Peter Singer offers a moral principle to support this verdict: Singer’s Principle: If we can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, then we ought to do so.

How does Singer’s argument upset traditional moral categories?

Singer states that the outcome of his argument is that the traditional moral categories are upset. The traditional distinction between charity and duty can no longer be made. All of those good deeds which did not cost us anything of comparable moral worth are moral obligations not charity.

What Singer says about famine relief?

e. So none of us can be obligated to give most of our income to famine relief. Singer replies that, while my obligations are indeed the same as everyone else’s in my circumstances, the fact that others won’t do as they’re obligated to do is itself a relevant feature of my circumstances, and one I can recognize

What does Peter Singer’s challenge famine Affluence and Morality suggest the US and its citizens are morally obligated to do?

Peter Singer offers a moral principle to support this verdict: Singer’s Principle: If we can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, then we ought to do so.

What does singer argue that we have a moral obligation to do?

Famine, Affluence, and Morality argues that people who are affluent, or rich, have a moral obligation to donate to help humanity. They must donate more than someone with less income in Western society would, simply because they have more to give.

What is the problem that singer sees with our traditional moral categories?

A duty to give Singer says we have a duty to reduce poverty and death simply because we can. the failure of people in the rich nations to make any significant sacrifices in order to assist people who are dying from poverty-related causes is ethically indefensible.

Leave a Comment