"Rich and Poor" analysis h

"Rich and Poor" analysis h - Phil 61 Vaidya...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Phil 61 Vaidya 5-15-06 Rich and Poor Peter Singer, Ira W. Decamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University, writes in his book, Practical Ethics , many different arguments from his point of view discussing some of today’s moral issues. According to an excerpt from Practical Ethics , “Rich and Poor”, Singer feels that given certain qualifications we are obligated to give money to those in need. He argues for the conclusion that the rich have an obligation to assist the poor. In other words, Singer’s point is that many people have wrongly thought that giving money to people in need is simply a charitable that they may do, but they are not required to do so. This paper consists of several arguments in order for him to make his point, in which I will continue to select one of his arguments and argue against the conclusion. Furthermore, I will consider how he might have any objections towards me. One of Singer’s main arguments begins with the fact that it is easier to avoid killing someone than to fail to save someone’s life. Springer uses the following argument to begin his discussion of whether we have an obligation to assist:
Background image of page 1

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

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

Page1 / 3

"Rich and Poor" analysis h - Phil 61 Vaidya...

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

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