philosophy

Philosophy 101

Summer Semester 2021

Handout #8

Peter Singer: Famine, Affluence, and Morality

The core argument:

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, we ought, morally, to do it.’ (example: the drowning child)

3. Proximity/distance and the actions of others make no difference

4. It follows that ‘…the traditional distinction between duty and charity cannot be drawn.’ In fact, much of what we perceive as charitable action – giving to good causes – is nothing more than what we are required to do as moral agents.

Additional issues:

· How much are we required to give:

· Strong version: to the point of marginal utility

· Moderate version: somewhere above that level (but still a lot more than we currently do)

· Should overseas aid be considered a government responsibility?

· Does relieving famine merely postpone starvation?