Peter Singer's Work on Poverty and Its Connection to the Ethical Dimension

Peter Singer's Work on Poverty and Its Connection to the Ethical Dimension
Name:
Course:
Professor Name:
(November 17, 2011)
Peter Singer's Work on poverty and its connection to the ethical dimension
Introduction
Economists’ philosophies and theories have always tried to explain poverty and others clearly explaining the viscous cycle of poverty. Some say people are poor just simply because they are poor and they lack the means to move out of the poverty. Poverty remains a controversial especially on the causes and means to evade it; but one thing that is clear is that it still to affect many individuals. Peter Singer argues on the issue and gives a solution that involves a collective act to end poverty. He bases his arguments on practical ethics where everyone is obligated to be his/her brother’s keeper. This paper tackles his work on poverty and its connection to the ethical dimension in regards to the world today. It also gives an opinion at the end and the reasons why I don’t agree with his ideas.
Peter Singer’s View
In the article “Famine, Affluence and Morality” of 1972 he outline the famine of 1971 that was in East Bengal. He argued that the famine was inevitable since the people had no ability; moreover no government or humanitarian organizations sent enough aid relief to save the situation. Also their representatives never voiced the depth and complexity of the situation so that people would be helped. They watched as people died from the ignorance and hence Singer concluded that this was not morally justified and that the way we view moral issues should be changed for the better.
Since then the world has continued to experience major crises and catastrophes with people dying from hunger and other avoidable reasons. In chapter 11 of “Ethical Theory: A Concise Anthology” there are some facts about poverty. Approximately 400 million people lack essential nutrients such as vitamins, proteins and minerals. On the other hand, millions suffer from hunger, deficiency diseases and illnesses. It is true that people live in absolute poverty which is characterized by malnutrition, lack of shelter, diseases, illiteracy, poor living environment and lack of health care. This is a complete contrast of others who live lavishly with the pleasures and leisure’s of this world. They always have enough to eat, spare and even waste.
Criticism
The moral obligation claimed by Singer remains a subject of debate since he never relied on any moral theory in his reasoning. He made a simple plan that would ensure everyone accepted his or her obligations from understanding the situation. Singer assumed that any suffering from lack of food, health care or shelter is dreadful. In his reaction, he asks the reader to believe other theory if he or she disagrees with the view that suffering is bad. The other assumption in his work is that people have the power to prevent bad things from happening without a sacrifice and thus everyone is obligated to do anything that seems moral. This forms part of his thesis in the article and it still remains ambiguous. In saying without sacrifice, then it will limit those who have enough to share with those who have, in fact in most cases people never get enough and will always search for more. Sacrifice always counts in giving given that without sacrifice people may even give out bad things. According to Singer explains the phrase “without sacrificing anything of comparable importance” to mean that the sacrifice is intended not to cause something else as bad as the sacrifice to happen. It also means doing something that is right or with an objective to enhance good morals in the bad situation prevailing. He argues that people need not be pushed to perform such good works and they should always feel free to help the destitute and needy.
In his case of the shallow pond he explains how morals should play a part in the reasoning and mentality to take an action. He ...