Preview

Kevin Carter Famine

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1045 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Kevin Carter Famine
In 1994 Kevin Carter won the Pulitzer Prize for Photography thanks to a photograph that he took in the village of Ayod in Sudan of a child crawling towards a feeding center. Whether it was morally right for him to have captured that moment instead of helping the child is a debate with many people. Some people believe that it was right because it helped stop the famine in Africa, others believe it was wrong because he did not aid the child after taking the picture. It is understood that there was thousands of refugees walking and crawling towards the food center, so was he suppose to help everyone or just that child? In philosophy class we have been talking about Morality in Kant’s point of view which is the Categorical Imperative and also about …show more content…
They were there because they wanted other countries all around the world to stop the famine, yet he did not help a child when it was in his hands to help that child and just left. Carter here was contradicting his believes to start with. Carter did not only just take the picture but waited several minutes for the vulture to spread his wings so he could get a more dramatic shot. Carter did not only use the child to get a picture but waited patiently to get a better picture instead of scaring the vulture right away from the child and helping him or her. There were more pictures that could have impacted us, and I am sure that if he looked around he would have found this is why I do not believe he should have taken the …show more content…
I believe that Carter had the responsibility to help the child because he saw the child suffering and in danger of getting attacked by the vulture. Given the fact that he was the only one there he had the responsibility to help the child. We should do unto others what we would like to be done to us. If I was in that child’s position I would have liked to be helped like I am sure Carter would have too. I think that if Carter would have helped the child he would have not been depressed and committer suicide because he would have known he did something good by helping the child. Like I said before I am pretty sure he could have chosen another photograph to get his point across to have people help stop the famine. Besides he wanted people to help yet it was in his reach to help this child and he did not? He was going against his own believes in my opinion. I believe that it was morally wrong for Carter to not help the child get to the food bank or at least a safer place, closer to were that child could get the help

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Carter's presidency was marked by several major crises, including the takeover of the American embassy and holding of hostages by students in Iran, a failed rescue attempt of the hostages, serious fuel shortages, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.…

    • 310 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The Dr. Jerry Carter Jr. comes from Columbus Ohio. He is the fourteenth pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church in Morristown, New Jersey.…

    • 1451 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The text explains that one is less interested in children in distant places. The text highlight the example of the child drowning in the pond to explain the contradiction of one’s moral reasoning. Like the dog, one feel responsible for one child not many children. One is best able to respond when dealing with a “single victim”. Thus, “mass suffering” would not get the attention it needs because there is too many people involved. That’s the reason why some people are not interesting in donating for poverty…

    • 377 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1985, The Iran and Iraq war is feuding overseas and America had an embargo against selling arms to Iran. Our President was Ronald Reagan and the National Security Adviser was Robert McFarlane. “Iran made a secret request to buy weapons from the United States, McFarlane sought Reagan 's approval” McFarlane told Reagan “that the sale of arms would not only improve U.S. relations with Iran, but might in turn lead to improved relations with Lebanon, increasing U.S. influence in the troubled Middle East.” Reagan was having trouble with Lebanon the Iranian terrorist had Seven American hostages being held in Lebanon. Reagan was frustrated that he couldn’t bring these American hostages back home he believed that it was his duty. The U.S. an Iran were going to have to make a deal missiles for the hostages the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State were against making the deal but Reagan, McFarlane and the CIA director were all for the deal. Since Reagan backed the deal 1,500 missiles were shipped to Iran. The Iranian terrorist released three hostages but later captured three more.…

    • 654 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    PHI 208 Week 2 assignment

    • 1300 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In Peter Singer’s 1972 post titled “Famine, Affluence and Morality”, he conveys that wealthy nations, for example the United States, has an ethical duty to contribute much a lot more than we do with regards to worldwide assistance for famine relief and/or other disasters or calamities which may happen. In this document, I will describe Singers objective in his work and give his argument with regards to this problem. I will describe 3 counter-arguments to Singer’s view which he tackles, and after that reveal Singer’s reactions to those counter-arguments. I will explain Singer’s idea of marginal utility and also differentiate how it pertains to his argument. I will compare how the ideas of duty and charity alter in his suggested world. To conclude, I will provide my own reaction about this problem supporting singer’s argument. Should wealthier nations have a moral duty to relieve poorer nations if a disastrous event were to happen? I think that we all must contribute in times of need even if this means substantially modifying the way in which we live for the objective of assisting other people so long as it doesn't cause us to suffer.…

    • 1300 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Peter Singer immediately encourages acceptance of his first moral standpoint with his comment: “If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it” (413). At first, what he is asking seems very straight forward, but on closer examination, he is asking for a complete shift in our thinking and our existence. He supports this with the idea that distance makes no difference in our moral obligations. The old adage that charity begins…

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    In Peter Singer’s article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” there are a few items that require further discussion. Peter Singer critiques our ordinary ways of thinking and in spite, very few people have accepted his conclusions. I will discuss Peter Singer’s goal and his presented argument in relation to this issue. In return, I will also mention the three counter-arguments to his position and the responses made by Singer. It is important to define Singer’s concept of marginal utility and to show the relation to his argument. We will need to compare how the ideas of duty and charity change in Singer’s proposed world. Finally, in conclusion my own personal response will be made to Singer’s argument either supporting his position, going against his position, or simply in the middle of his position. To begin one must truly understand the definition of an argument in the terms of philosophy. “For philosophers, then, the term "argument" doesn 't imply the idea it often does when we use the term to suggest anger, emotion, and hurt feelings. Rather, in this context, arguments simply present a conclusion and suggest why certain reasons indicate that conclusion is true, or probable” (Mosser K, 2010).…

    • 1132 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The issue of moral obligations towards the global poor has always been a contentious affair to be discussed for fear of problematic resolutions that may affect academia on a personal level. Peter Singer, most notable for his authorship of “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” and the drowning child analogy, presents the rather uncommon normative view that affluent persons are morally obligated to donate more resources to humanitarian causes than the present standard. Singer’s perspective on these seemingly radical moral ideals are confronted by many a pragmatic objection, ranging from entitlement principles to moral inequalities. Nevertheless, Singer builds his argumentative framework in regards to moral obligations to the global poor on solid…

    • 1239 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Say your family and you are struggling to meet your basic needs such as food during a harsh famine. Your basic instinct is to acquire food by any means necessary. One way you could get food is by stealing it from your neighbor. In this essay I will examine whether this issue is morally right. I will argue that by using Kant’s End in itself theory, stealing food from your neighbor in time of famine is morally wrong.…

    • 727 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Explain how a follower of Kantian ethics might approach issues surrounding the right to a child. [25]…

    • 2219 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    For those who frightened much to abandon their life, goals, projects and interests in order to save one’s life, say goodbye to righteousness. In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, also in “ the life you can save”, Peter Singer tries to show that we human beings have a moral obligation to give far more than we actually do for excessive and tragic situations such as famine and disaster relief. According to singer, Giving, sharing and helping the needy is more than moral happiness and inner satisfaction, it is a moral duty. As he state his argument in three premises, “1, suffering and death from the lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad, (2), if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening,…

    • 1598 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Jesus colon made the decision not to help the white lady, but I disagree with his decision not to help. Since it was 1961 and the color of your skin was judged by different races, I can understand why Jesus did not ask the white lady because he thought he might get himself in jail or something even worse like getting beaten to death. Also that is showing that Jesus is being very cautious. I think Jesus should have decided to ask the lady if he could have helped her because he knew that was the right thing to do. Also asking is showing that he he has respect which is better than just helping the child because then he could get in serious trouble. If Jesus was another race, for example a white man he may have gone and asked and not have been…

    • 268 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Emmanuel Kant (hereinafter “Kant”) believes that Ethics is categorical and states that our moral duties are not dependent on feelings but on reason. He further states that our moral duties are unconditional, universally valid, and necessary, regardless of the possible consequences or opposition to our inclinations (Pojman and Vaughn 239).…

    • 273 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Immanuel Kant Analysis

    • 472 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Immanuel Kant is a philosopher that has always stuck out because the way he approaches morality is particularly different than most other philosopher. Some would say that Kant’s philosophy works satisfactorily in a perfect world, but fails to account for how the world actually is, which is far from perfect. Even if this is true the groundwork of Kant’s work has still garnered the admiration of many philosophers that were during and after his time.…

    • 472 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    I believe that Immanuel Kant would see Carter Druse's action of shooting his father as moral. Kant was an ethicist that believed that morality was based on duty, that ethics is absolute, not conditional, and is based on reason, not feelings. (Pojman, Vaughn 309)…

    • 286 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays