Peter Singer's Philosophical Ideas Of Poverty

Poverty is one of the worst problems people face in the 21st century. There are many philosophers around the world that have their own opinions and ideas on this issue. One of these philosophers is Peter Singer. He is an Australian philosopher who is a professor of bioethics at Princeton University. Singer is also a laureate professor at the Center for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. This essay will evaluate and investigate his philosophical ideas about poverty. It will summarize his argument in the first section and in the second section it will present reasons to agree with Singer.
In this section, the essay will study Peter Singer’s argument on why everyone should donate to less fortunate people in other
She is excited to make some easy money as she is not wealthy. After taking the child to the place where he will be adopted, she learns that the child will be killed and his organs will be sold. After learning this, she decides to save the child because she believes that a child’s life is worth more than any amount of money. Singer then asks if she had not been told about what was going to happen to the boy, would she have given it a second thought? He states that we are in the same situation because we all know that children around the world are in need, but many of us choose to do nothing about it. He says “How about treating yourself and your partner to dinner at your favourite restaurant? But wait. The money you will spend at the restaurant could also help save the lives of children
He says that the average family only has to donate $200 to save one child. If they donate that amount of money every week or month, they are saving children without greatly affecting their bank account. Singer (1999) gives an example to further his reasoning. A man has a very expensive car that he can sell after his retirement to live comfortably. One day he notices a runaway train with no one aboard. A boy will be hit by the train if he does not throw a switch, but if he does so his car will be destroyed. The man decides not to throw the switch and the boy is killed. Singer states that everyone would agree that what the man did was wrong. He then reminds us that we have opportunities to save children every day. He asks if we do not donate to organisations to help poor children, are we just as bad as the man and his car? The premise of this argument is true because if someone donates money, they are giving away something of value but saving an innocent person. If sacrificing some of your money will save a child’s life, then it is worth it because the life of a child cannot be compared to any amount of money. Although the premise of Singer’s argument is sound, there are flaws in it. After using the example of the woman in the movie and the sad demise the child almost succumbed to, and the man letting the child die to save his car, it is clear to see that Singer is using these sad stories of children to make the