In this essay “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” Peter Singer is trying to persuade the society that the world hunger and poverty will be solved if people from wealthy society donate the money that spend on their luxuries to the aid organization. He gives two controversies examples of Dora’s situation and Bob’s situation which help to strengthen his argument. From that examples it is also supports his arguments in favor of his altruistic position. On the other hand he also address the objections to his arguments which is “fair share” and “the limit of the donation.
One of the examples is about a Brazilian woman, named Dora, who is told that she can get one thousand dollar if she can persuade street boy to a given address for adoption to …show more content…
The story is about Bob put most of his retirement saving in buying his new Bugatti. However he is in a bad situation when he parks his car near the end of railway siding and there is a train coming. The situation becomes worse because there is a far away child on the track that can be killed by the train. He can throw the switch to save the child but his car will be destroyed. In the end Bob chooses to save his car instead of the child. Peter Singer argues that most people will think that Bob’s action is unhuman and wrong than he remind us that we also have the opportunities to save children around the world from dying through organization such UNICEF or Oxfam America etc. By comparison, Singers states “…Bob’s situation resembles that of people able but unwilling to donate to oversea aid….”(203) Since the result of Bob not throwing the switch is that the child died, that can be said the same to the people not donating to help poor children results in children dying. In other word, Singers believes that if we think everything is wrong when it is involving children death then it is also wrong for not donating to the charities because it also leads to children’s death. Singer also provides a calculation and information on how much we need to donate in order to save a 2 year-old child. The action for not donating to the charity is called active non-giving where as you asked directly to give …show more content…
I believe that people should has the right to control his or her own wealth that they work hard for. Since it is a hard earned money, it always a struggle to whether give the money away and the feeling of not getting enough money. No one can force you to donate your money to the charity of you don’t want to and donating toward charity is something that should be done out of the goodness of your heart.
Overall, Peter Singers has a strong examples to persuade his readers to donate their money toward charity in order to fight poverty and hunger and to support his altruistic position. His arguments against “fair share” and “crowd ethic” are very well thought out. However I think the flaw of the article that make the readers hesitate of his persuasion is when he asked people to donate most of their earning which I believe majority of people is not willing to do
One of the examples is about a Brazilian woman, named Dora, who is told that she can get one thousand dollar if she can persuade street boy to a given address for adoption to …show more content…
The story is about Bob put most of his retirement saving in buying his new Bugatti. However he is in a bad situation when he parks his car near the end of railway siding and there is a train coming. The situation becomes worse because there is a far away child on the track that can be killed by the train. He can throw the switch to save the child but his car will be destroyed. In the end Bob chooses to save his car instead of the child. Peter Singer argues that most people will think that Bob’s action is unhuman and wrong than he remind us that we also have the opportunities to save children around the world from dying through organization such UNICEF or Oxfam America etc. By comparison, Singers states “…Bob’s situation resembles that of people able but unwilling to donate to oversea aid….”(203) Since the result of Bob not throwing the switch is that the child died, that can be said the same to the people not donating to help poor children results in children dying. In other word, Singers believes that if we think everything is wrong when it is involving children death then it is also wrong for not donating to the charities because it also leads to children’s death. Singer also provides a calculation and information on how much we need to donate in order to save a 2 year-old child. The action for not donating to the charity is called active non-giving where as you asked directly to give …show more content…
I believe that people should has the right to control his or her own wealth that they work hard for. Since it is a hard earned money, it always a struggle to whether give the money away and the feeling of not getting enough money. No one can force you to donate your money to the charity of you don’t want to and donating toward charity is something that should be done out of the goodness of your heart.
Overall, Peter Singers has a strong examples to persuade his readers to donate their money toward charity in order to fight poverty and hunger and to support his altruistic position. His arguments against “fair share” and “crowd ethic” are very well thought out. However I think the flaw of the article that make the readers hesitate of his persuasion is when he asked people to donate most of their earning which I believe majority of people is not willing to do