Peter Singer: Famine, Affluence, and Morality

question 15

Multiple Choice

Peter Singer: Famine, Affluence, and Morality
Every year, natural and human disasters leave millions of people in dire need of help. Many people regard providing assistance to the victims of these disasters as an act of charity-something that is good to do, but that it is not wrong to refrain from doing. Singer argues that this is mistaken, and that nearly all of us are obligated to do far more to alleviate suffering around the globe. Singer's argument begins with two simple assumptions. The first is that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad. The second is the moral principle that "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." From these two assumptions, Singer claims, it follows that nearly all of us should be giving far more of our money to famine relief, and that spending this money on morally insignificant purchases (such as new clothes) is immoral.
Singer addresses several objections to his view. The first objection is this: because the suffering caused by famine would be alleviated if all affluent people were to contribute a relatively small amount, no single person can be required to contribute more than a modest sum. Singer allows that if everyone were to contribute to famine relief, no one would be obligated to contribute large sums of money. Because this is almost certain not to happen, however, Singer insists that we ought to do what we can to prevent suffering, provided that doing so will not involve sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance. The second objection maintains that Singer's view requires a substantial revision to our moral scheme, and requires us to make large sacrifices in our own well-being. Singer admits these consequences, but denies that they constitute legitimate objections. It might simply be the case that morality is very demanding. Further, Singer argues that his conclusion follows from the simple assumptions from which he begins; so, unless one has reason to doubt his assumptions or the soundness of his reasoning, one must accept his conclusion.
-Singer claims that he introduces the weak version of his principle:

• A) because people are usually more persuaded by it.
• B) because it is correct.
• C) in order to show that even on this undeniable principle a great change in our way of life is required.
• D) because accepting it leads to acceptance of the stronger principle.

---

Definitions:

Electroconvulsive Therapy

A method of treating psychiatric illnesses by deliberately causing seizures using electrical stimulation to aid in symptom relief.

MAO Inhibitors

Medications that prevent the breakdown of monoamine neurotransmitters, increasing their availability in the brain and often used to treat depression.

Tricyclic Antidepressants

A class of medications used primarily to treat depression, affecting neurotransmitter levels in the brain.

Carbamazepine

A medication used primarily in the treatment of epilepsy and bipolar disorder, as well as trigeminal neuralgia.