More handpicked essays just for you.
Unequal distribution of wealth
Wealth disparity between social classes in America
Wealth disparity between social classes in America
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Unequal distribution of wealth
To Save or Not to Save Garrett Hardin presents several ideals on saving the poor through the lifeboat metaphor although he fails to explain himself through a few of the ideas. The lifeboat metaphor states that there are fifty people in a lifeboat and there is room for ten others. Those in the lifeboat are rich, those in the water are the poor. Which ethics are they going to use to save those in the water? The world is divided into two sections: the rich and the poor. Garrett Hardin uses the Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against Helping the Poor to illustrate whether the poor should be saved by the rich or not. Throughout the Lifeboat Ethics he describes the situation. Ten people could possibly be saved by those fifty on the boat. All one hundred could be saved and the lifeboat would sink due to the capacity then both rich and poor would be in the ocean. Meanwhile the question is, who to save and who to leave behind. There …show more content…
Four scenarios he used throughout the essay are: the Christian and Marxist ideals, “Our brothers” and “Get out and yield your place to other” sayings. These were strengths because he listed several ways on how to save those people by using logic and not just choose. If there were Christians on the boat they would feel compelled to help the others, because they see everyone as equal regardless if they were inside or out the boat. Those that live by the “get out and yield your place to others” phrase would feel bad because they are safe and the others are not. They are willing to just automatically give up their spot. Some may see the poor as all the same and just have one need in common, that is, to get onto the lifeboat. The logical people on the boat will try to save those whose skills would be necessary to them overall. Throughout the essay he explains these scenarios on why and why they should not use
All different ethical theories can look at the same problem and come to different conclusions. Even philosopher’s such as Singer and Arthur understand and view ethical values differently. Peter Singer who uses the utilitarian theory believes that wealthy people should give to the degree that the wealthy person now someone in need themselves. John Arthur believes those in need or those suffering are only entitled to the help of the wealthy person if that person agrees to help, and that the property rights of the wealthy person declines the amount that Singer believes people should. People should help other people. I believe all people deserve the right to receive assistance and to not help those people would be morally wrong. However, I do not believe that the help that we are morally obligated to give should come at the cost of our own well-being.
David K. Shipler in his essay At the Edge of Poverty talks about the forgotten America. He tries to make the readers feel how hard is to live at the edge of poverty in America. Shipler states “Poverty, then, does not lend itself to easy definition” (252). He lays emphasis on the fact that there is no single universal definition of poverty. In fact poverty is a widespread concept with different dimensions; every person, country or culture has its own definition for poverty and its own definition of a comfortable life.
4. I think the author is a very strong headed but is a very determined when he goes to reach his goals. He thought of a new theory of how people populated the Americas. He could find heardly any support from anyone. So he divised a group of six people to sail across the Pacific on a raft. After they got the raft built, all the experts listed about 100 different ways they wouldn't make it, and he still went on the voyage.
“Two roads diverged in a wood and I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.” At some point in life one is faced with a decision which will define the future, but only time will tell whether or not the choice was right or wrong. The Boat by Alistair MacLeod demonstrates that an individual should make their own decisions in life, be open to new experiences and changes, and that there is no way to obtain something, without sacrificing something else.
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.
In a condition known as the “lifeboat situation” a choice must be made whether to override any animal’s rights. Tom Regan uses the lifeboat situation to argue in favor of the condition to override any animal’s rights. An example of the lifeboat situation Regan defends is a ship at sea capsizes and four humans and one dog...
In this case, knowing the ocean can be unpredictable these mean still chose to go through with their journey. Even though the probability of dying is low, taking a risk that could mean losing a life is not worth it. Therefore, people need to be knowledgeable about the activities that they are going partake in. For example, In “To build a Fire,” a man went on an expedition to map out a pathway and he went all alone, along with his dog. This man did not learn enough about his expedition until he got himself involved in the life or death situation. “That man from Sulphur Creek had spoken the truth when telling how cold it sometimes got in the country. And he had laughed at the time!” Consequently, the man had died on this journey, for making decisions that were risky. Another example of getting involved in a life-or-death situation is volunteering to go to war. Although these people want to protect their country, they need to know that there is a risk involved in going to war. For example, In the story “Moral Logic of Survival guilt,” it talks about soldiers who choose to go to war, and either come out dead or
There are several thought processes on the responsibility of the individual in relation to his station in society. One might advocate survival of the fittest while another takes the yoke of burden his brother carries as his own weighted responsibility. This timeless debate has been the focus of essays, books and heated arguments. Two authors, Garret Hardin and Nobel prize winner Muhammed Yunus, show juxtapositions on the subject and merit the examination of their opposing view points. Hardin makes a strong case against helping the poor in his essay entitled “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor.” Yunus has a completely different viewpoint in his writings and shows the merits of reaching out to the poor and providing the necessities to improve their station in life. While there is never a clear-cut solution to any problem that mankind faces, there are still strongly weighted, favored outcomes for either philosophy. Despite Hardin’s argument against
A Mexican woman, Marine, goes to a dance and sees a man she was dancing with killed in a hit and run. She has no idea who he was but yet it bothers her. “Only Marin can’t explain why it mattered, the hours and hours, for somebody she didn’t even know”. The strength and weakness factor is shown abstractly in this story. Sandra is showing the struggle of Mexican immigrants and how strong they have to be for what they go through. Marine though, feels weak and angry that he never could get back to his family or whoever he had left because she understood what he went through just as she went through a similar things. Yet her strength is shown when she knows she would have to move on though she couldn’t
Stephen Crane is well known in the literary world for his many underlying themes. In Stephan Crane's "The Open Boat," one of the many themes that can be seen is that of community. He brings to life the importance of the each individual's role in the group setting. Crane uses a dire situation in which men's lives are in the hands of each other to show that without group togetherness no one would make it. He shows the group being given false hopes from outside forces but, how in the end the group must band together for survival and not rely on anything but themselves. "The Open Boat" is one of Crane's best known works. Throughout the story, paralleling an actually event in his life Crane brings the reader inside the minds of his characters. By letting the reader see what each individual character is feeling, the sense of needing a community can be felt.
Stephen Crane’s short story, “The Open Boat,” conveys the experiences of four men who survive a shipwreck and find themselves set afloat on a life boat in the middle of the ocean. On the surface, the story paints a picture of the perils of being lost at sea and of the way that four men can come together in a time of distress and count on one another for strength and companionship. However, the story also discusses the theme of determinism, or the ideas that there are forces acting upon an individual, that these forces are beyond the control of the individual, and that these forces impact and shape the lives of those on whom they are exerted. Throughout the progression of the story these four men must come to terms with their own mortality and, more importantly, their own insignificance. Crane uses nature in many forms to reflect the concept of determinism; he presents nature in the form of the sea and the weather, and he also presents nature in the form of the tired and hungry bodies of men. The four survivors on this small boat struggle against these forces acting upon them as they fight for survival. In “The Open Boat” Crane pits man against nature, but it is a fight in which at least one of the competitors, nature, is not actively participating, and by showing this, Crane is able to demonstrate shifting perceptions as the men on the boat process their predicament and eventually come to the sad realization that there is no one to fight or to blame and that nature, in all its manifestations, displays no concern about whether they live or die.
To prove the truth of his statement he brings forth the following example; “If I am walking past a shallow pond and see a child drowning in it, I ought to wade in and pull the child out. This will mean getting my clothes muddy, but this is insignificant while the death of the child would presumably be a very bad thing.” (Peter Singer) The fundamental rule of utilitarianism is that anybody with a surplus of wealth must donate that surplus to the poor. Giving that extra money will not affect that persons’ life in a drastic way, the pain of dying of starvation outweighs the pain of living without luxury by far and therefore giving is not considered an option but an obligation. The most important part of giving a donation is making sure the money actually goes to those in need. Finding a reliable organization is not easy an easy task, UNICEF and Oxfam are some of the few poverty relief associations that have proven to use the donations received to actually help poor
It doesn’t matter if they got in a bad accident by choice or by bad luck, everyone deserves to be saved. When a natural disaster occurs you have no way of preventing it, especially if you don’t know what the severity of the disaster will be. “Even as climate change increases the risk of natural disaster, cities can be made increasingly safe, as long as public policy makers carefully prepare”(Kim par.4). It doesn’t matter how much you prepare, there is always someone that will get hurt or something goes wrong. When something does go wrong, it is not your fault and you shouldn’t have to be held accountable for the issue. You would not want to pay for the issue that happened and neither do they. People shouldn’t be held accountable and pay with money or guilt for theirs or anyone else's
In Garrett Hardin’s “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against Helping the Poor, Hardin argues that you should not help the poor because there are limited resources and if the poor continue to seek help they will continue to overpopulate, disrespecting all of limits. Hardin supports his argument by using the lifeboat metaphor while trying to convince the rich not to lend a helping hand to the poor. In the lifeboat metaphor Garrett Hardin uses the upper class and the lower class people to give us a visual of how the lifeboat scenario actually works. Along with the lifeboat metaphor, Hardin uses the tragedy of commons, population growth, and the Joseph and Pharaoh biblical story to persuade the readers.When reading “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against
In 1842 a tragedy occurred when a ship struck an iceberg and more than thirty passengers piled onto a rescue boat that was meant to hold a maximum of seven people. As a storm became evident and water rushed into the lifeboat, it was clear that in order for anyone to survive the load would need to be lightened. The commanding captain suggested that some people would need to be thrown overboard in order for anyone to survive. There was a great argument on the boat between the captain and the passengers who opposed his decision. Some suggested that the weakest should be drowned, as miles of rowing the lifeboat would take toll on even the strongest. This reasoning would also make it absurd to draw names of who should be thrown over. Others suggested that if they all stayed onboard no one would be responsible for the deaths, although the captain argued he would be guilty if those who he could have saved perished in the process. Alternatively the captain decided that the weakest would be sacrificed in order to save the few left on the lifeboat. Days later the survivors were rescued and the captain was put on trial for his virtues.