Analysis: The Singer Solution To World Poverty

1429 Words3 Pages

The Australian philosopher Peter Singer, believes that when we refuse to help end world hunger, we become murders. He believes that it is are moral obligation as Americans who live comfortable lives, to help “the worlds poor” (Singer 1). It is wrong to continue to live a luxuries life, when we know that others are fighting for the mere chance to survive. In Peter Singer’s “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” he compares us Americans to two fictitious characters Dora and Bob, due to the fact that we as Dora and Bob chose luxuries over the chance to help people suffering from life-threatening poverty. Peter Singer compares us to a fictitious character from a Brazilian film called “Central Stations.” He believes that our actions are identical to Dora’s actions in the film. He calls us Americans out on the fact that we “spend one-third of [our] income on things not essential to the preservation of our lives and health” (Singer 1). He compares this to Dora giving up the “9-year old boy” (Singer 1) she We do not shine light on the gruesome idea that it is in our hands to change the fate of many dying children because it is normal behavior not to. We, Americans, have become a predictable collective group as we become a domino effect in the way that we allow each generation to affect the next creating what we know to be as normal behavior. By not donating money and turning the other cheek, we do not blame each other for allowing the worlds poverty to continue to be a problem because it is normal behavior. Peter Singers solution goes against our taught behavior, and simply states that “whatever money [we] spend on luxuries, not necessities, should be given

Open Document