Monday, October 04, 2004

There's an essay by the controversial philosopher Peter Singer here about how we can end world poverty, and it is worth a read. No, really, it's simple! I have thought a little about charities and morality since seeing About Schmidt a few days ago, and this just reinforces the idea. Singer's essay asks a question that I believe was part of a philosophy game that I posted earlier, which goes something like this: if you go out to dinner tonight with friends or family, and spend $100 on it, are you morally responsible for the death of a starving child in Somalia who might have been saved had you donated $100?

Some of this is powerful stuff, I fear I don't have the energy to dwell on it any further right now, but maybe I will do so tomorrow.
Posted by at

1 comment:

Jenny said...

the mob mentality of "others can donate, I'm not like bob who was the only one who could save the kid's life" was demonstrated most horribly in the 1960s, when kitty genovese (a new york citizen) was stabbed in front of many witnesses which did nothing.. simply because they thought someone else was. responsibility is apparently shared among the number of individuals present..

the movie with dora in it also sort of points to this eh? she was the only one involved with the kid and all responsibility for his well being was placed on her once she found out what she'd done..

I agree with peter singer that if everyone stubbornly sticks to the idea that they only have to do what's required of them (at most), then we (our world) are quite stuffed.. but then I'm also not going to eat just bread and water for the rest of my life.. T__T oh dear, yeah, this is powerful stuff o.o

9:15 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)