Charity is not an obligation, “giving aid would be a good thing to do but it would not be wrong not to do it” (Gilabert, 2007). In Singer’s eyes, these “traditional moral categories are upset” (Singer, 1972). Spending money on frivolous items when others are suffering and we have the means to satisfy or own needs and the needs of our dependents is in the eyes of Singer to be wrong (Singer, 1972). It is not an act of charity to donate money to those suffering from lack of shelter, food, and medicine it is in fact a duty that many are ignoring (Singer, 1972). The distinction between duty and charity seem to blur closer together for him than what has been traditionally set by society.
Simpler questions would be “Is Dr. Smith’s intentional practise of omitting important information relevant to his client’s treatment ethical?” or “Is Dr. Smith’s failure to report his client’s actions to the authorities morally justifiable?” Both would be good questions, but I believe the question the study guide asks us to consider embrace both of these questions. The possible answers to the question are “yes” or “no”. I will be using rule-based utilitarianism and Kantian deontology to analyse this case study. There is not enough information to consider act-based utilitarianism: Act-based utilitarianism essentially says that one should perform that act which will bring about the greatest amount of good (“happiness”) over bad for everyone affected by the act. Each situation and each person must be assessed on their own merits (Thiroux, 2004, p. 42).
Singer’s Quest: An Examination of “Famine, Affluence and Morality” Robert Black PHI 208 Ethics and Moral Reasoning Instructor: Zummuna Davis March 11, 2013 In 1971 Peter singer wrote that people and governments had a moral obligation to endeavor to aide famine victims in less fortunate nations. In his article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Mister Singer put forth the position that if we can stop the wrong, or famine in this case, without sacrificing any comparable moral position than we must do this (Singer 1972). In this paper the writer will show if this is a valid argument or if there is another more valid. In Mister Singer’s article he argues that closeness has no bearing on moral obligation: we have as much a duty to help someone across the world as someone in our own backyard. This is a very strong argument in favor of helping: if suffering can be stopped then you must put forth the effort regardless of proximity.
The idea of selflessness and helping others is almost completely dead and gone. In the past people would look out for one another but now people only look out for themselves and what’s good for them. In “Wisdom”, Robert Thurman encourages the thought of selflessness. He believes that being selfless is more important than being selfish and that society today has become corrupt. In “An Army of One: Me”, Jean Twenge shows how todays society is selfish and narcissistic, the exact opposite of the selflessness Thurman wants us to be.
Disadvantages for the service provider The disadvantage will be that we have to tolerate the life style choices of other people, because poor choices lead to poor outcomes. Social justice Advantages for the service user The advantage for service user might be that the service user doesn’t have to be worried about, that someone will laugh at their race, religion, etc. They can feel good how they are. Disadvantages for the service user The service user may meet the service provider, which doesn’t tolerate people from different countries. Advantages for the service provider Disadvantages for the service provider A service provider might not tolerate a person, which is different race, gender, religion, etc.
I previously stated death and suffering from malnutrition are bad, therefore if we can prevent famine without harming ourselves we ought to do it. Ought is a misleading term so I am going to replace it with “morally obliged”. The logical force driving Singer’s construction of his second premise is simply if an individual has the ability to prevent something bad from happening without causing comparable damage and loss of moral integrity, the individual has a duty as a human being living on earth to do
Just by reading the title of the article we can tell his position which is more about personal responsibility rather than collective. He is against the fact that government should take measures to prevent obesity. He believes that this is not the right way to fight it. According to Radly Balko is best to consider obesity as a private matter not public. He believes that people would be more responsible if they had to pay for the consequences of their own acts.
Knowledge of ethnic differences alone does not help counselors be more effective. The knowledge must be turned in to actual tactics. If a counselor takes the over simplified information that minority groups prefer a more directive approach to counseling and puts that in to practice, they will be ultimately ineffective as a counselor because that is not what counseling is all about. Changing counseling practice to match the merely presumed needs of a group of clients should not mean abandoning good counseling work. When a counselor is too directive in attempt to fulfill the needs of the minority groups in such a way as to become more assertive and directive, they are watering down the principles of good counseling and will be ineffective because the client will not gain the ability to resolve their own
In this article the author sets out to prove that as human beings we have not made the necessary decisions in order to help those in need (Singer). Singer feels that giving to people in need is the only ethical thing to do regardless of the excuses we come up with to get out of doing so. The example he uses to plead his case is the famine in East Bengal. In his writings Singer states that there was no particular reason for choosing this plague other then the fact that it was currently happening and that due to its publicity this event can’t be over looked (Singer). To prove his point the author brings up the fact that government s such as the British and Australians put more effort into beautification than into the welfare of those suffering.
We tend to dumb down the truth because we cannot accept that people are made up of both good and bad. Which seems odd because that sentiment should be something every single human being can relate to. Its evident that Lincoln had prejudices and faults, but that does not and should never demean his political genius as well as the irreplaceable role he