In 'Famine, Affluence And Morality' By Peter Singer?

771 Words4 Pages
Running Head: FAMINE, AFFLUNECE AND MORALITY PHILOSPHY 208 ETHICS AND MORAL REASONING PROFESSOR TREDINNICK SEPTEMBER 2, 2013 The main purpose of Peter Singers "Famine, Affluence and morality "is that all people have moral duties. Peter Singer brought about several arguments in his article. Singer’s arguments ranged from lack of food and shelter, preventing something bad from happening and alleviating poverty. Singers arguments for famine relief states that suffering from death of lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad (Singer, 1972). It also states that it is our power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance. We should help others out of moral reasoning. According to Singers arguments our traditional moral categories are wrong and need to be corrected (Singer, 1972). Peter Singer thinks that we should correct our moral standards and work towards our moral sensibilities. Working towards our moral sensibilities will reflect the fact that there is no distinction between dutiful acts and supererogatory acts. Supererogatory acts are something that is nice to do for others yet we are not obligated to do…show more content…
I do believe that people suffering from lack of food, shelter and medical care is bad. I also think that if we can prevent something from happening we should do so without sacrificing moral importance. Just like in reference to the example Peter gave of the drowning child, I would not have thought about the shoes on my feet first. My first instincts would have been to save the child. However, I cannot swim but I would have found a branch or something to give the child to hold onto and grab so I could help pull the drowning child to safety. I also must say I agree that in Peter arguments he says that money to the rich is not the same as to the poor, I personally feel this to be a true
Open Document