18 Jan Peter Singer is trying

PHI115 ETHICS

Week 12 Discussion

Peter Singer is trying to convince us that we ought–morally–to be doing a lot more to help other people in the world. There is no moral difference between a person living in our borders and a person living somewhere else. There might be a cultural difference or a linguistic difference between them, but a person is a person. Morally, there is no difference. There is also a lot of need in the world. There is need here and there is need there. Need is need. Part of thinking about altruism is thinking about how to get the most bang for our bucks. We have to be thinking about that, too. Peter Singer takes facts like this, adds a few moral premises, and concludes that we–individually, sure, but also as a nation, should be doing a lot more to help those in poverty. Do you agree?

Or, do you think about it like Hardin does? His paper is less rigorous than Singer’s (he’s not a professional philosopher, after all), but he does present a case that suggests we don’t have a moral obligation to help those in poverty. Is he ? Do you agree? Why or why not?

Note: each post should include either a quoted passage from the reading (along with page number where it can be found) or a paraphrase/summary/statement of a thought contained in the reading (along with a page number where it can be found). You can disagree with the thought expressed in the reading. You can agree with it. You can use it as a jumping off point for your own thoughts. Great! But, make sure you give a page number.