Famine, Affluence, and Morality

PHI 208: Ethics, and Moral Reasoning

In the article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Mr. Singer offer a harsh response on the nations poverty, medical reform, and resources for the homeless community. He also expresses his outrage in the wealth’s population, and their lack of assistance in reaching out to the less fortunate. He conveys how the lacks of compassion for our fellow man resulted in over nine million individual becoming destitute refugees.
Mr. Singer’s first argument that affluent individual are not making an impact is the basis of the entire article. He argues that the wealthy should offer more resources to address the housing poverty, and medical issues in the world. “Generally speaking, people have not given large sums to relief funds; they have not written to their parliamentary representatives demanding increased government assistance; they have not demonstrated in the streets, held symbolic fasts, or done anything else directed toward providing the refugees with the means to satisfy their essential needs” (Singer, 1972, p. 229).
The second argument that Mr. Singer argues is that “assumption that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad” (Singer, 1972, p. 231). Persons that are more opulent then others are not doing their part as noble citizens by giving back to the community. They are allowing another life to parish because they are less fortunate. Mr. Singer’s thoughts about the wealthy not lending a hand is along the lines of standing by, and doing nothing to save an innocent life, is the same as killing a person in cold blood.
In the third and final argument, he uses the scenario that if a person witnesses a young child drowning, our duty as a human being is to try, and rescue the child in danger. Jumping in the water to save the life of the child is the correct thing to do no matter what opposition this article is heading. How can anyone stand there and not see the urgency in bringing assistance to...