Peter Singer Famine

831 Words4 Pages
In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer expressed his viewpoint on society’s moral obligation to help those consistently struggling to find shelter, clean water, and nutritious food. The article as a whole describes Singer’s view on reducing world poverty with the help of society’s fortunate. I believe that Singer’s desirable belief that we as a society have a moral obligation to help the less fortunate is too demanding for society as a whole. Singer’s argument in defending his proposed obligation consists of two principles. 1.) “Suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad”. 2.) “If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance,…show more content…
This impractical proposition would eventually harm the poor. Kuper suggests that since there is already so much misery in the world, asking society to give up other values to help the poor would impoverish those helping. Bernard Williams features in Kuper’s article “More Than Charity” stating that values consisting of love, work, wisdom, art, and truth are arguably just as important for those who can experience them. Along with worsening the state of those intending to help, donating could potentially harm the poor by causing them to become further impoverished. Regarding the example of the needy in South Africa, the wealthy help by touring and purchasing products or services that the poor provide. The system of dependence would collapse and allow no money to be profited because donations would prevent the wealthy from investing in those helpful purchases. Other helpful purchases that would succeed more than donations itself would be to invest directly to the poor. By giving money directly to them for products or services would increase the amount received and assure the donations final destination. These potential faults show the impracticality of this moral obligation by Singer. Kuper’s objection as a whole would undermines Singer’s proclaimed moral obligation by realistically displaying the “what if” scenario. Society’s donations all of their “extra funds” would impoverish the lives of those who are wealthy and in return only worsen the state of the poor. Kuper challenges the obligation with universal appliance as well as stating that it is not society’s fault in itself, but the system that is to
Open Document