On the other hand, Cousins wants us to help the poor because it actually helps them. Cousins address that, “the best way to bring down the birth rate is not to let people starve, but to give them a better life.” (Cousins 733) And the best way to give them a better life, Cousins states, is not by “cutting back on aid, we ought to be stepping up shipments of fertilizer, chemicals, plows, tractors, harvesting machines, tools, engines, dynamos, and thousands of other items involved in upgrading living standards.”(Cousins 733) Not helping the poor or “Hardinism can become a wild
It is obvious that PSS is facing a hard dilemma in adaption to change. PSS could choose to drop its total mission and depend on FSS, the HUD’s new project, to offer the poor families the social welfare, but it is an irresponsible method. So HASCO needs to continue its mission. PSS has successfully helped for hundred motivated families from public assistance and provide universal access to all welfare families rather than just those the program operates define as motivated. i Facing the new policy, as the Director of HASCO, Holt needs to make sure his objectives.
Critical Analysis on “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate.” Dan Gardner’s publish, “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate”, is strongly controversial in his position against increasing enforcement of drug laws, and boosting penalties for violators. He believes that you should actually limit enforcement and hardship of sentencing when it comes to drugs. Was his argument persuasive enough in the essay to actually influence his wishes into society? Personally, I don’t think so. Gardner’s ideas are too drastic and I believe he didn’t have enough support in his argument that his plans would actually decrease the murders in gang violence.
If my £100 could maximize utility more efficiently when I donate it to famine relief rather than spending it on new shoes utilitarianism would argue that it is morally wrong to do anything other than what maximizes utility, therefore it is morally wrong for me to buy the shoes (Stanford Encyclopaedia, 2003). The objection thus states that giving to famine relief is probably better than buying new shoes, however the act is supererogatory. It seems to go beyond “the call of duty” to make it obligatory for people to give to charity instead of spending 2 Student ID: 1103832 PH212 Formative Essay – 27/02/2013 their money as they please. Individuality and choice is taken away from people if they are always required to maximize utility. We will go into further detail when considering Williams’ argument of integrity.
The Imperial secretary Sang Hongyang declares “abolition of these measures is not expedient.” This statement means that Legalists believe the policies are necessary to keep the empire running and that it is not practical to abolish them, for then the treasuries would be depleted and funding for defense for the soldiers would be obsolete. Then he goes on to explain how “equitable marketing” was established and how it contributes to their country. Before this system, the people would send respective products as tributes to support the country, but the Legalists think that people are untrustworthy and should be governed by laws to force them to do good. They came up with this set of laws, i.e. setting up transportation offices, forcing the people to send their goods to these places because the government did not trust the quality of the products sent from the people.
‘’Singer’s view of our obligation to help relieve the suffering of people in distant nations.’’ In this paper, I’m going to argue that Singer’s view of our obligation to help relieve the suffering of people in distant nations are right because, if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it. The fundamental defect of Singer's argument is that, given our experience of human nature, he sets the moral bar at an impossibly high level. Very few of us readily would or could live up to the standard he asks of us. If society attempted to set its moral standards at Singer's level, we can predict one of three consequences. If his standard
The source based on Listerine Advertisement shows a great value to people in the 1920s due to giving yourself a better breath. It proves that if you have halitosis, “no matter how charming you may be or how fond you your friends are, you cannot expect them to put up with halitosis.” Sometimes you can’t just doubt some advertisers because some of their products can help you in some ways. Also, on the source “The Poor Little Bride of 1860” it show the changes back in the day where there weren’t the recipe to make pancakes and you’ll have to come up with the right ingredients but for today, you just go to the grocery stores and purchase a pack of the mixture. “The Poor Little Bride of 1860” explains how the young bride couldn’t make the tender pancakes like her Aunt for her husband and later gave up. Now, the young bride doesn’t have any more trouble making pancakes because the recipe are premix.
Deforestation is when trees and other vegetation is being removed converting the forest to another land use, this exposed the soil and often leads to erosion and loss of soil fertility. The valuable nutrients of the soil are being washed away by erosion. To prevent this, we need to stop cutting down trees to create so many buildings, business owners should try to find established dwellings to put their business on. Deforestation also poses a threat to the food chain. These three major causes of soil erosion can be prevented and it will benefit everyone as a whole by creating a sustainable society for our environment.
“Modest Proposal” verses “Lifeboat Ethics” First of all, making life decisions for others cannot manipulate the world to become equal. Society has moral obligations toward poverty. Usually the moral obligation to others starts with the intense poverty issue. By reading Jonathan Swift and Garrett Hardin’s articles, the solutions for poverty seem to be easier than ones’ expectation by slaughtering or leaving refugees behind the social norms. Nonetheless, both articles are idealistic.
I previously stated death and suffering from malnutrition are bad, therefore if we can prevent famine without harming ourselves we ought to do it. Ought is a misleading term so I am going to replace it with “morally obliged”. The logical force driving Singer’s construction of his second premise is simply if an individual has the ability to prevent something bad from happening without causing comparable damage and loss of moral integrity, the individual has a duty as a human being living on earth to do