{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

PHIL 140-Famine, Affluence and Morality

PHIL 140-Famine, Affluence and Morality - Famine Affluence...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Famine, Affluence, and Morality: by Peter Singer Begins w/ 2 moral principles o Suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad o If we can prevent something bad from happening (w/o sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance) then we should do it o We should prevent something bad from happening “unless we have to sacrifice something morally significant” Conlusion: It is moral duty, not charity, for affluent nations to help starving people in poor countries Britain and Australia are the two countries that aid others w/ the most money Supererogation : performance beyond the call of duty Duty vs. Charity 1. According to Singer, what are the moral implications of the situation that occurred in East Bengal? A: We should help them. 2. What is Singer’s first moral principle? A: Suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad 3. What is the second principle? Distinguish between the two different versions of this principle. A: If we can prevent something bad from happening (w/o sacrificing anything of
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 2

PHIL 140-Famine, Affluence and Morality - Famine Affluence...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online