Peter Singer Rhetorical Analysis

383 Words1 Page

Peter Singer is an Australian ethical and political philosopher, best known for his work in bioethics. He argues that our ordinary patterns of spending money on ourselves are immortal. He thinks that spending money on things that benefit us rather than others, are not essential to preserving our lives or health. He believes that we should give most of our hard earned money to the poor or homeless. Singer states, “The money we spend on fancy dinners, new clothes, or vacations could instead be sent to relief agencies that save people’s lives.” Singer offers three cases where people have the opportunity to prevent an innocent person’s death, but fail to do so. The person in each of these examples has done something extremely immoral or wrong.

Show More
Related

  • Rhetorical Analysis

    854 Words  | 2 Pages

    Jonathan Kozol revealed the early period’s situation of education in American schools in his article Savage Inequalities. It seems like during that period, the inequality existed everywhere and no one had the ability to change it; however, Kozol tried his best to turn around this situation and keep track of all he saw. In the article, he used rhetorical strategies effectively to describe what he saw in that situation, such as pathos, logos and ethos.

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis 1984

    586 Words  | 2 Pages

    “People who had incurred the displeasure of the party simply disappeared and were never heard of again.

    Read More

  • Andrew Carnegie And Peter Singer

    1346 Words  | 3 Pages

    Singer’s belief that everyone should give away all excess wealth to eliminate as much suffering as possible conflicts with the idea of competition and, therefore, reduces the productivity of human civilization. Peter Singer, a professor of moral philosophy, stated in his essay “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” that it is everyone’s duty to participate in philanthropy since it is morally wrong to not help someone who is suffering. Singer thoroughly explained the details of the “duty” of philanthropy: “we ought to give until we reach the level of marginal utility - that is, the level at which, by giving more, I would cause as much suffering to myself or my dependents as I would relieve by my gift.” If this philosophy is followed, and the poor beneficiary experienced the same level of comfort as the wealthy benefactor, then what incentive would the beneficiary have for

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Peter Singer's Famine, Affluence And Morality

    1021 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence and Morality,” Singer makes three claims about moral duty; that avoidable suffering is bad, that it is our moral obligation to help others in need, and that we should help those in suffering regardless of their distance to us or if others are in the same position as we are to help. First, I will elaborate on Singer’s arguments for each of these positions. Next, I will discuss two objections to Singer’s position, one that he debates in his writings and another that I examine on my own, and Singer’s responses to those objections. Then I will examine why Singer’s rebuttals to the objections were successful.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Peter Singer's Famine, Affluence, And Welfare

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer argues that our conceptions on moral belief need to change. Specifically, He argues that giving to famine relief is not optional but a moral duty and failing to contribute money is immoral. As Singer puts it, “The way people in affluent countries react ... cannot be justified; indeed the whole way we look at moral issues-our moral conceptual scheme-needs to be altered and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society”(135). In other words Singer believes that unless you can find something wrong with the following argument you will have to drastically change your lifestyle and how you spend your money. Although some people might believe that his conclusion is too radical, Singer insists that it is the logical result of his argument. In sum, his view is that all affluent people should give much more to famine relief.

    Read More

  • Famine, Affluence, and Morality

    2018 Words  | 5 Pages

    Peter Singer organizes his arguments into an outline form allowing a reader to take individual thoughts, adding them together giving a “big picture.” Within the first few pages, Singer shares two guiding assumptions in regards to his argument to which I stated above. The first assumption states “that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad” (231). Singer steps away from the typical writing style; he states the assumption yet he does not give a personal comment in regards to the assumption. He chooses to do so because the assumption itself is surely uncontroversial; most people would agree, but to those who don’t agree, there are so many possibilities at which to arrive to this assumption that, after all, if they don’t yet comprehend its truth, it would be hard to convince them of its accuracy. Speaking for myself, if I encountered an individual that does not agree to the assumption that death by avoidable causes is bad; I would not hesitate to declare them of being heartless. There are many cases, whether across oceans on foreign land or areas to which we live, where people are dying because of inescapable, unfortunate reasons. Within such cases, even a possible little voice in the back of the head can lead one to wonder who has the responsibility of helping those who are enduring such unnecessary deaths. This sense of wonder leads us to Singer’s second assumption; “if it is in our power to prevent something from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it” (231). To better clarify what this assumption is looking for, Singer points out that “It requires u...

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis

    929 Words  | 2 Pages

    Pollan’s article provides a solid base to the conversation, defining what to do in order to eat healthy. Holding this concept of eating healthy, Joe Pinsker in “Why So Many Rich Kids Come to Enjoy the Taste of Healthier Foods” enters into the conversation and questions the connection of difference in families’ income and how healthy children eat (129-132). He argues that how much families earn largely affect how healthy children eat — income is one of the most important factors preventing people from eating healthy (129-132). In his article, Pinsker utilizes a study done by Caitlin Daniel to illustrate that level of income does affect children’s diet (130). In Daniel’s research, among 75 Boston-area parents, those rich families value children’s healthy diet more than food wasted when children refused to accept those healthier but

    Read More

  • Peter Singer's Paper 'Famine, Affluence and Morality'

    1498 Words  | 3 Pages

    Peter Singer's paper “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”has made a drastic impact on modern applied ethics. The simple nature of the paper makes for an easy read, yet the point clearly set out by Singer is at the end with the targeted audience's popular beliefs. Although most will object to Singer's idea by throwing away a basic principle of most moral theories, I wish to deny Singer's solution by showing that the ability to apply Singer's conclusion is not reasonable and does not address the problem's core. Singer starts with the assumption that suffering and death from lack of the essentials of food, water, shelter, and proper medical assistance are bad. I find no problem with accepting this assumption, as it is consistent with most widely accepted moral theories.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Peter Singer And Onora O Neill's Position On Famine Relief

    1016 Words  | 3 Pages

    Bentham, an act utilitarian, created a measurement called hedonic calculus that calculates if an action is wrong or right by determining factors like intensity and duration of pleasure. Singer strains on the importance of the act by the number of people affected from it. He believes that every human being is equal. Therefore, geographical and emotional closeness is irrelevant to moral responsibilities. He states that “death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad” and that if you disagree “read no further” because it would be hard to convince anyone otherwise (P. 231 Singer). He argues that if we can prevent bad things from occurring without “sacrificing anything of moral importance” it’s our moral obligation to act on it (P.231 Singer). What is not clear is as to how much we should give, as we should keep in mind that not everyone in the world gives aid to famine relief so we must take that into account. Singer then tries to make it easier on us by stating that instead of negotiating something of comparable ethical significance in his second premise, it can be of any moral significance. He also believes that if one is to ignore a duty to aid others then he or she is no different than an individual who acts wrong. This is because he believes that it is our moral responsibility to do good deeds and people dying is wrong

    Read More

  • Goody Proctor Rhetorical Analysis

    763 Words  | 2 Pages

    Men and women, Goody Proctor (nod), people of the court, I stand before you today to reclaim the innocence this town has lost. Salem has been in anarchy driven by the heathens you (scan the room) have chosen to believe. Today, I present to you my deposition to no longer reprieve Abigail Williams. I will be corroborating all my points today in order for justice to be served.

    Read More

  • rhetorical analysis

    684 Words  | 2 Pages

    The movie trailer “Rio 2”, shows a great deal of pathos, ethos, and logos. These rhetorical appeals are hidden throughout the movie trailer; however, they can be recognized if paying attention to the details and montage of the video. I am attracted to this type of movies due to the positive life messages and the innocent, but funny personifications from the characters; therefore, the following rhetorical analysis will give a brief explanation of the scenes, point out the characteristics of persuasive appeals and how people can be easily persuaded by using this technique, and my own interpretation of the message presented in the trailer.

    Read More

  • Famine Relief

    1822 Words  | 4 Pages

    Famine, Affluence, and Morality; Singer suggested, “we should prevent bad occurrences unless, to do so, we had to sacrifice something morally significant” (C&M, 827). However, different philosophers and writers have criticized his view and the general idea to help the poor.

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of Letter From Birmingham Jail

    630 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Letter from Birmingham Jail was written by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in April of 1963. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of several civil rights activists who were arrested in Birmingham Alabama, after protesting against racial injustices in Alabama. Dr. King wrote this letter in response to a statement titled A Call for Unity, which was published on Good Friday by eight of his fellow clergymen from Alabama. Dr. King uses his letter to eloquently refute the article. In the letter dr. king uses many vivid logos, ethos, and pathos to get his point across. Dr. King writes things in his letter that if any other person even dared to write the people would consider them crazy.

    Read More

  • Peter Singer's Argument Analysis

    225 Words  | 1 Pages

    Peter Singer’s argument in Animal Liberation will have implications for the moral permissibility of abortion. He argued that all species deserve equal consideration from the other species, one must not be bias towards their own species. At some stage of pregnancy, when the fetus developed the ability to feel pain, doing abortion would be impermissible according to Singer. This is because he was for utilitarian view, which is the concept of minimizing pain and suffering, and maximizing happiness. The goal in life is to bring an end to pain and to reach happiness. Abortion would be immoral because a fetus would experience any kind of pain or suffering. This is immoral because Singer’s moral was to minimize suffering however, doing abortion would

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism In John Singer's Peter Singer Solution To World Poverty

    1828 Words  | 4 Pages

    Peter Singer practices utilitarianism, he believes the consequence of an action matters more than the reason behind the action. Singer is trying to convince his audience to donate their money to end world poverty. He believes it is moral to give as much money as the person can give, allowing them to purchase just enough for them to live on, and this will be the right action to take. Singer is aiming toward the United States to contribute more to charity. Singer does not consider specific aspects that do not support his argument and causes his argument to not list specific aspects of his belief. Singer’s argument is not a good argument because he does not consider the ramifications of people donating their surplus of money would do to the economy; is it our duty to feed the poor; and that our moral intuitions are not consequentialist at all when it concerns what our rescue duties entail.

    Read More

More about Peter Singer Rhetorical Analysis

Open Document