Famine, Affluence, and Morality Essay introduction. With this, he offers a philosophical approach to a new world where, instead of giving to charity, everyone living in these affluent nations ought to make it their duty to give anything of excess to those suffering across the globe and live at the marginal utility, which he would prefer.
Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work.
Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp: Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in to build trusted digital archives for scholarship.
We enable thescholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform thatpromotes the discovery and use of these resources. The suffering and death that are occurring there now are not inevitable, not unavoidable in any fatalistic sense of the term.
Constant poverty, a cyclone, and a civil war have turned at least nine million people into destitute refu- gees; nevertheless, it is not beyond the capacity of the richer nations to give enough assistance to reduce any further suffering to very small proportions.
The decisions and actions of human beings can prevent this kind of suffering.
Unfortunately, human beings have not made the necessary decisions. At the individual level, people have, with very few exceptions, not responded to the situation in any significant way.
Generally speaking, people have not given large sums to relief funds; they have not written to their parliamentary representatives demand- ing 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.
At the government level, no government has given the sort of massive aid that would enable the refugees to survive for more than a few days. Britain, for instance, has given rather more than most countries.
It has, to date, given? For comparative purposes, Britain's share of the nonrecoverable development costs of the Anglo-French Concorde project is already in excess of?
Australia is another country which, on a per capita basis, is well up in the "aid to Bengal" table. Australia's aid, however, amounts to less than one- twelfth of the cost of Sydney's new opera house.
The total amount given, from all sources, now stands at about? The esti- mated cost of keeping the refugees alive for one year is? Most of the refugees have now been in the camps for more than six months. The World Bank has said that India needs a minimum of?
It seems obvious that assistance on this scale will not be forth- coming. India will be forced to choose between letting the refugees starve or diverting funds from her own development program, which will mean that more of her own people will starve in the future.
So far as it concerns usi here, there is nothing unique about this situa- tion except its magnitude.
The Bengal emergency is just the latest and most acute of a series of major emergencies in various parts of the world, arising both from natural and from man-made causes. There are also many parts of the world in which people die from malnutri- tion and lack of food independent of any special emergency.
I take Bengal as my example only because it is the present concern, and because the size of the problem has ensured that it has been given adequate publicity. Neither individuals nor governments can claim to be unaware of what is happening there.
What are the moral implications of a situation like this?
In what follows, I shall argue that the way people in relatively affluent coun- tries react to a situation like that in Bengal cannot be justified; indeed, the whole way we look at moral issues-our moral conceptual scheme -needs to be altered, and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society.
In arguing for this conclusion I will not, of course, claim to be morally neutral. I shall, however, try to argue for the moral position i.
There was also a third possibility: Since I wrote this paper, India has taken this way out.Famine Affluence and Morality Utilitarianism Quiz What is utilitarianism?
Peter Singer is a utilitarian, and this is a utilitarian argument, but he hopes it succeeds regardless of the truth of utilitarianism. Effective altruism is a philosophy and social movement that uses evidence and reasoning to determine the most effective ways to benefit others.
In the essay 'Famine, Affluence, and Morality', A basic argument for altruism was defined in Singer's paper "Famine, Affluence. tranceformingnlp.com Famine, Affluence, and Morality Author(s): Peter Singer Source: Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol.
1, No. 3, (Spring, ), pp. Certainly, Singer’s essay “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” is extremely influential in the discourse surrounding the ethics of global poverty. He maintains the importance—duty, in fact—of charity through the notion that people, if it is in their power, must prevent bad things from happening so long as it does not allow something.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality Lisa Radden PHI Ethics and Moral Reasoning Victor Kersey June 10, Famine, Affluence, and Morality In "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" Peter Singer main goal is to let people know how people are living in East Bengal.
In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer argues that all people have a moral obligation 1 to donate all that we can to the famine relief in Bengal tranceformingnlp.com applies to all people regardless of any other person’s inaction.