Travis Timmerman: a Reply to Singer

question 13

Essay

Travis Timmerman: A Reply to Singer
In "A Reply to Singer," Travis Timmerman examines Peter's Singer argument for the claim that we are morally obligated to donate most of our expendable income to aid organizations. Timmerman focuses on the second premise of Singer's argument (which states that if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable importance, we ought, morally, to do it), and argues (i) that Singer fails to justify the truth of this premise and (ii) that there are positive reasons to reject it.
Singer's defense of his second premise rests on the famous "Drowning Child" thought experiment. According to Singer, our intuitive moral reaction to this thought experiment-that it is wrong not to save the life of a drowning child at the expense of new clothes-shows that we already accept the truth of his premise, at least implicitly. Timmerman disagrees. Because we rarely, if ever, find ourselves in the position Singer describes, our intuitive reaction to the "Drowning Child" case is informed, according to Timmerman, by the implicit assumption that it describes an anomalous, one-off event. Timmerman then points out that an intuitive conviction that it is wrong not to make a single, one-time monetary sacrifice to save the life of a child is not the same as, nor does it entail, the belief that we are obligated to spend our entire lives repeatedly making similar sacrifices, as Singer's premise requires of people in situations like ours. Singer's attempt to justify his second premise-by showing that our moral intuitions reveal we already accept it-therefore fails on Timmerman's view.
Timmerman next argues that if we consider a more relevant analogy ("Drowning Children"), in which a person is in a position to save many drowning children everyday over the course of her entire life at comparably insignificant personal cost, our moral intuitions actually conflict with Singer's second premise. Timmerman therefore concludes that not only do our commonsense moral intuitions fail to support Singer's second premise, they also reveal that people positively reject the truth of the premise.
-Timmerman claims that Singer fails to provide an adequate justification for his second premise. How does Timmerman argue for this claim? Is his argument convincing? Why or why not?

---

Definitions:

Mound-Building Tribes

Indigenous peoples of North America who constructed various types of earthen mounds for religious, ceremonial, burial, and elite residential purposes.

Aztec Empire

A Mesoamerican empire based in the Valley of Mexico, known for its rich mythology and cultural achievements, before falling to Spanish conquerors in the 16th century.

Inca Empires

A large empire in South America that flourished in the Andean region from the early 15th century until its conquest by the Spanish in the 16th century, known for its unique architecture, road systems, and terraced farming.

Wealthy

Individuals or entities possessing a substantial amount of money, assets, or property, affording them a high standard of living.