Famine, Affluence, and Morality Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Famine, Affluence, and Morality - Essay Example We should according to peter be ashamed of our self and we should be guilty for our decision not to help those in the refugees’ camps, who are dying of hunger and due to lack of shelter and medication (Singer, 1972). According to him it should be good to help them and also not good not to help them. People who then don’t contribute toward assisting the unfortunate in the society should be condemned. Singer is actually right that we have an obligation to help minimize world hunger. This is because those trapped in such situations is not by their own making. Those in Bengal if we don’t rise to the occasion they will just be wiped with hunger (Singer, 1972). This situation is really not inevitable because if we decide to give towards a project to get the camp closed then in matter of months the problem will have been solved. We have therefore never given much attention to the magnitude of the situation at the ground. We have richer nations that have the capacity to bring this situation to an end (Singer, 1972). They are making millions of money and channeling towards research and development while turning a blind eye to human beings dying in refugees’ camps. ... We can therefore help to raise many so that India can not divert resources allocated for development to feeding refugees because this will cause another similar problem in the future. Al the governments of the world are aware of this situation in India and other parts of the world and therefore can not take refuge in pretence of not having been aware of it. Because the governments are therefore aware of this they should contribute towards it so that the blight of the refugees can be gathered for (Singer, 1972). The individuals are also aware of this and it is therefore immoral not to help those suffering yet you have information of their blight. B The most compelling part of singers’ argument is the fact that we should prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing something else of same importance (Singer, 1972). This is rather compelling because it is practical and real that we can be able to get rid of this suffering in the refugees and at the same time we will no t have created other such situations which means that such situations are brought to an end and totally gotten rid of. It is therefore not so much demanding to do so because we are only required to stop what is bad and no further demanded from us to promote good. If we therefore contribute to help those in refugee camp by giving money that we earn we will have helped them get out of the situation and at the same time we will have but ourselves in the same circumstance as that of the refugees. C Despite singers’ insightful argument in favor of moral obligation to get rid of hunger in the world, there are also enough reasons not to believe so. It can not be argued that