$30 off During Our Annual Pro Sale. View Details »

Peter Singer on global poverty

Peter Singer on global poverty

Slides for an Introduction to Philosophy course at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC, Canada. These slides talk about Singer's articles: "Famine, Affluence & Morality," and "The Singer Solution to World Poverty"

philosophy
Singer
Peter Singer

Christina Hendricks

March 12, 2018
Tweet

More Decks by Christina Hendricks

Other Decks in Education

Transcript

  1. PETER SINGER ON
    AFFLUENCE & GLOBAL
    POVERTY
    PHIL 102, SPRING 2017
    CHRISTINA HENDRICKS
    UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
    Except images licensed otherwise, this
    presentation is licensed CC BY 4.0

    View Slide

  2. TWO WAYS SINGER ARGUES
    1. Argument from a principle he thinks we will
    all accept (“Famine, Affluence & Morality”)
    2. Argument from analogy (mostly in “The
    Singer Solution”)
    If an act is morally right
    in this situation
    It is morally right in a
    similar situation
    Situation 1 Situation 2

    View Slide

  3. ARGUMENT FROM
    A PRINCIPLE

    View Slide

  4. OUTLINE HIS ARGUMENT IN “FAMINE,
    AFFLUENCE, & MORALITY”
    • Conclusion: many people
    should be doing more to
    help those in need than
    they are.
    • What is the principle he
    bases his argument on?
    • What other premises are
    there?

    View Slide

  5. EVALUATING ARGUMENTS
    Remember the steps in
    evaluating arguments:
    1. Are the premises true?
    2. If the premises are true,
    does the conclusion follow
    with certainty or high
    probability?
    • Deduction & induction
    Concl.

    View Slide

  6. EVALUATING SINGER’S ARGUMENT
    Discuss with one or two others & write down
    on doc linked below:
    1. Premises true?
    2. Conclusion follows with certainty or high
    probability?
    3. Anything else you think should be taken
    into consideration when evaluating this
    argument?
    https://is.gd/phil102singer

    View Slide

  7. SINGER ON DUTY AND CHARITY
    Morally
    required/prohibited
    What must or must not
    be done
    Singer: “duty”
    Morally
    permissible/optional
    1.What can be done
    (what is permitted)
    2.Supererogatory:
    praiseworthy but
    optional
    Singer: ”charity”

    View Slide

  8. IMPLICATIONS
    Draw line between
    morally required
    (duty) and
    supererogatory
    (charity) differently
    We should be
    “working full
    time to relieve
    great suffering”
    (“Famine”)
    Image licensed CC0 from pixabay.com

    View Slide

  9. Comfortably off people
    should give 10% of income
    (“The Singer Solution to World
    Poverty” (Singer 1999))
    5% for those doing quite well ($100,000 to $150,000 U.S.),
    more for those with higher incomes, less for lower
    (The Life You Can Save (Singer 2009))
    Image licensed CC0 from pixabay.com

    View Slide

  10. Creating bricks, Flickr photo shared by
    International Disaster Volunteers, licensed CC
    BY 2.0
    NOT ONLY MONEY!
    Donate time, food, books, your knowledge & expertise…
    Soup kitchen in Chicago opened by Al Capone (1931), public domain
    On Wikimedia Commons

    View Slide

  11. WHAT DO YOU THINK SO FAR?
    Learning Catalytics questions…

    View Slide

  12. ARGUMENTS
    FROM
    ANALOGIES

    View Slide

  13. THE CHILD IN THE POND
    “She Summons Ducks,” Flickr photo by Peter Lindbergh, licensed CC-BY

    View Slide

  14. THE CHILD ON THE STREET
    (DORA EXAMPLE)
    “Dogs Get Better Treatment, Homeless Boy, Jakarta, Flickr photo shared by Danumurthi
    Mahendra, licensed CC-BY

    View Slide

  15. BOB AND HIS BUGATTI
    Bugatti Veyron Grand Sport Red/Black, Flickr photo shared by Axion 23, licensed CC-BY

    View Slide

  16. EVALUATING ARGUMENTS FROM
    ANALOGY
    1. It is morally wrong to do action X in
    situation A
    2. Situation A is similar in morally relevant
    respects to situation B
    3. If it is morally wrong to do X in A, then it is
    morally wrong to do X in B
    Therefore, it is morally wrong to do X in B
    Are each of these premises true,
    for Singer’s analogies?

    View Slide

  17. ACTING ON ARGUMENTS
    “What is the point of relating philosophy to public
    (and personal) affairs if we do not take our
    conclusions seriously? In this instance, taking our
    conclusion seriously means acting on it.”
    (“Famine”)
    The Life You Can Save website, with a calculator
    for how much you should give, a pledge to give
    that much, and charities that have been
    researched:
    http://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/

    View Slide