Books The Guardian

wordery Buy Books Online, Over 10 Millions Books

The Life You Can Save Acting Now to End World Poverty Review × 109

Summary The Life You Can Save Acting Now to End World Poverty

The Life You Can Save Acting Now to End World Poverty Review × 109 ↠ [PDF / Epub] ✅ The Life You Can Save Acting Now to End World Poverty Author Peter Singer – Using ethical arguments provocative thought experiments illuminating examples and case studies of charitable giving phiUsing ethical arguments provocative thought experiments illuminating examples You Can PDF #204 and case studies of charitable giving philosopher Peter Singer The Life PDF shows that our current response to world poverty is not only insufficient but ethically indefensibleSinger contends that we Life You Can PDFEPUB #228 need to change our views of what is involved in living an. You are walking past a shallow pond and you see a small child has fallen in No one else is around The child is in obvious distress and will drown without your immediate help You are however wearing a gorgeous set of clothes you have lusted over for months and have just managed to purchase You are also running late for work Do you wade in to help the child ruining your clothes and being late for work or do you walk on byThis is the thought experiment with which Peter Singer a Professor of Bioethics at Princeton opens his discussion on the ethics of charity Given this story the vast majority of people will of course say that they would save the child and would consider it reprehensible to do otherwise or to consider their clothes or lateness for work as serious obstacles The underlying premise being that if we can lessen the suffering of an innocent other at minimal cost to ourselves it is wrong not to do so The situation can also be thought of in terms of the golden rule stated in various forms by all the major world religionsSinger states a simple argument First premise Suffering and death from lack of basic necessities such as food shelter and medical treatment are bad thingsSecond If you can prevent something bad without sacrificing anything nearly as important it is wrong not to do soThird By donating to aid agencies you can prevent some bad thingsConclusion Not donating to aid agencies is wrongIf we accept this argument we are led to some radical conclusions It is morally wrong to spend money on anything unless it is to prevent something bad happening – or for something nearly as important From this argument Singer goes on buying a bottle of mineral water or a can of soda when one can get perfectly potable water from a tap is morally unjustifiable as the outcome is not nearly as important as saving a child’s life 18000 children every day die of malnutrition or preventabletreatable conditions That's about one every 5 seconds Several objections to this line of argument are discussed Some brief highlightsObjection There is no binding universal moral code People have a right to their own beliefs and practicesResponse Agreed But as a society we try to stop rape and murder and would not accept that someone has the right to torture animals or children because they believe it is fun This suggests we are not complete moral relativistsObjection People work hard and have the right to decide what they spend their money onReponse Agreed This is simply one argument for what people should do with their money People have the right to do whatever they wish with it but if they chose to flush it down the toilet or bury it rather than to save human lives we would likely consider it wrongObjection If we did not cause the suffering of others we have no general moral obligation to alleviate itResponse There are many ways in which we can indirectly contribute to the suffering of others for example in our pollution of the atmosphere commercial fishing which devastates local communities or our extraction of oil and minerals from countries whose people do not benefit from them Nonetheless even in cases where we have demonstrably done nothing wrong our moral obligation is not lessened Thinking back to the child drowning in the pond the fact that we did not push them in does not lessen our feeling of obligation to help themObjection Philanthropy breeds dependency undermines real economic and political change and sustains the immoral status uoResponse There are situations such as disaster relief in which immediate donations are reuired to save lives In the longer term we must be extremely careful in how we give charity Many charitable organisations these days do not simply give hand outs but aim to engineer sustainable change in communities Revolutionary change in global socio economic and political structures may be desirable and if one believes that it would be right to devote serious resources of time money and energy towards achieving it Our concerns are practical and pressing We know that doing nothing will not help In the absence of revolutionary change or while such change is being brought about by your Che Guevara T shirt – if we can do something to help we shouldObjection It is natural and ingrained by evolution to treat yourself and those close to you as important than people very far away with whom we have no tiesResponse Agreed But it does not necessarily follow that it is right to spend extravagantly to purchase luxuries for ourselves our friends and our families when the money could help relieve serious sufferingObjection freebie not in the book Doctorsnursesparamedicsetc save lives every day Surely they’re already doing their bitResponse In the developed world jobs in healthcare are generally prestigious and well paid For every position there are tens sometimes hundreds of applicants If any one person were to choose to do something else there would be several people eagerly ready to take their place In the drowning child scenario and in many catastrophic situations around the world there is little or no help available and our personal choices will have a significant difference on the outcomeThe book goes on to discuss some of the economics of charity in detail particularly in terms of governmental donation and ways to measure the efficacy of aid The organisation GiveWell is plugged as an independent monitor of aid organisations’ bang for buck Of Singer’s several striking examples of charitable work one is the Fred Hollows foundation which provides sight restoring cataract operations in the third world Between 1993 and 2003 the foundation restored sight to a million people at a cost of around 50 a popAnother example is the Worldwide Fistula Fund Childbirth without adeuate medical attention particularly in young or malnourished women who have small pelvises can be very prolonged This can cause tears called fistulae between the vagina and the rectum or bladder Women suffering from such fistulae have a continuous flow of urine or faeces through the vagina and are outcast from their families and communities The Worldwide Fistula fund provides fistula repair operations for these women and girls Speaking of Lewis Wall president of the fund Singer tells us « In Liberia the previous summer he had operated on a sixty seven year old who had developed a fistula when she was thirty two and had been living soaked in urine for thirty five years It tooks twenty minutes to repair it in surgery » Ongoing long term approaches focus on education and prevention particularly to reduce pregnancy in young girls but in the interim asks Dr Wall « What is it worth to give a fourteen year old girl back her future and her life » Although we cannot answer the uestion of what it is worth we can answer the uestion of how much it costs about 350The last section of the book discusses the bottom line how much are we willing to give What is our fair share A variant of the drowning child story illustrates the problems with the fair share uestion Imagine that you come across a shallow pond with ten drowning children in it There are nine other adults around You leap in and pull out a child expecting the other adults to do the same But looking around you see that the other nine have ignored the children and walked on Having done your fair share do you now leave – or do you try to save another childIf rigorously applied Singer’s moral argument would make it impossible for us to spend our money on anything that is not of eual value or nearly to saving a child’s life Excepting a few saintly ascetics this is clearly untenable for the most of us Fortunately Singer also recognises it as such After ualified praise of the Bill Gates foundation and scathing denunciation of the uncharitable super rich – the Larry Ellisons and Paul Allens of the world with their 200m super yachts he turns to the likes of me and you After all as we have seen the can of soda and the Patek Philippe watch sit morally in the same super yachtSinger’s solution is a scale of regular charitable donation starting at 1% of personal income below US100000 per year 5% between 100 150k and increasing thereafter to a maximum of 33% of income over 10m per year A little arithmetic shows that even a fairly limited subscription to this modest standard would meet the funding reuirements of the UN Millennium Development Goals several times overAs a point of departure it seems reasonable This is a rare book that is not only thought provoking but action provoking I’ve been swayed by Singer’s arguments and have signed his online pledge thelifeyoucansavecom The tap water in Canada is amongst the cleanest in the world

Peter Singer ¿ 9 Read

Ethical life To help us play Life You Can Save Acting MOBI #194 our part in bringing about that change he offers a seven point plan that mixes personal philanthropy figuring how much to give and how best to give it local activism spreading the word in your community and political awareness contacting your representatives to ensure that your nation's foreign aid is really dir. The World Bank defines extreme poverty as not having enough income to meet the most basic human needs for adeuate food water shelter clothing sanitation health care and education Many people are familiar with the statistic that 1 billion people are living on less than one dollar per day That was the World Bank’s poverty line until 2008 when better data on international price comparisons enabled it to make a accurate calculation of the amount people need to meet their basic needs On the basis of this calculation the World Bank set the poverty line at 125 per day The number of people whose income puts them under this line is 14 billion Author Peter Singer thinks and writes about “acting now to end world poverty” from philosophical ethical and practical points of view Singer is the challenging author of Practical Ethics and Animal Liberation ; both books have their own histories of stirring up controversy Here are some of the uestions and issues that The Life You Can Save addresses Is it wrong not to help Common objections to giving Why don’t we give Creating a culture of giving How much does it cost to save a life and how can you tell which charities do it best From his other books I saw Peter Singer as a person who is committed to certain ideas and who does not pull any punches I trusted that he would “tell it like it is” and that I could find his message persuasive I wanted to be convinced to donate of my income and assets to make the world a better place I have the example of my father and mother who were very generous with their financial resources My father still is For example when someone who helped my father do chores and repairs around his house found his income reduced the value of his house “under water” with high mortgage payments Dad offered 1000 monthly to help with the mortgage until the man’s wife became eligible for social securitySince I have retired I have increased my charitable giving to the point where it is 10% of my gross income Instead of buying a new car or doing some home improvements I would like to increase my charitable giving I support local organizations like the Greater Lynchburg Meals on Wheels and the Free Clinic of Central Virginia I support state organizations like Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty and the Virginia Legal Aid Society I support national organizations like the Human Rights Campaign and the Natural Resources Defense Council I would like to increase my giving to UNICEF and Doctors without Borders and have of an impact internationally since I know the most severe poverty is outside the US So I wanted Peter Singer to give me a pep talk And it worked I now have a goal of becoming a philanthropist Can I do that on a gross annual income of 50000 I have decided based on examples in the book that I can All things can be done with sufficient exclamation pointsSinger is a controversial philosopher He supports a utilitarian world view you determine what is best by determining what creates the most good for the most people I always thought that was an over simplification but it does sound good on the face of it doesn’t it But I have a hard time reconciling Singer’s view that the sanctity of life is highly overrated with this book In his book Practical Ethics he or less supports euthanasia for defective infants He has taken a lot of shit for that He has been controversial in other ways as well I usually like to evaluate the “whole person” to make decisions about how much credence and credibility to give to a person I have some trouble with Singer since I think he has some weak links to go with his brilliance But there are real and serious dilemmas for the conscientious person who wants to help The real dilemma for most of us is whether it is wrong and unnatural to reject our children’s pleas for the latest expensive computer games to spurn designer labeled kids’ clothing and to send them to the local entirely adeuate but not outstanding public schools The savings you gain by taking the less expensive option in each case will allow you will allow you to donate sums toward saving the lives of strangers But do your obligations to your own children override your obligations to strangers no matter how great their need or suffering Peter Singer introduces us to people who have made decisions that many if not most of us would consider impossibleSometimes in Haiti Farmer will hike for hours to see patients far from any roads He insists on doing this because to say that it takes too much time and effort to visit these patients is in his view to say that their lives matter less than the lives of others Flying from the peasant huts and their malnourished babies in Haiti to Miami just 700 miles away with its well dressed people talking about their efforts to lose weight Farmer gets angry over the contrast between developing countries and the developed world What troubles him most is what troubled him all those years ago about the American doctor who was about the leave Haiti “How people can not care erase not remember” Now you might want to say “If you are going to uote the entire book why don’t you just tell me to read the book myself” Well I certainly urge you to do that but here is just one thought the conflict that Farmer and Kravinsky feel so acutely between being an ideal parent and acting on the idea that all human life is of eual value is real and irresolvable The two will always be in tension No principle of obligation is going to be widely accepted unless it recognizes that parents will and should love their own children than the children of strangers and for that reason will meet the basic needs of their children before they meet the needs of strangers But this doesn’t mean that parents are justified in providing luxuries for their children ahead of basic needs of others I think that this is the kind of book where you are probably going to be receptive to the message if you decide to read it I could uote but I am going to resist I strongly urge you to read this book if you have a goal of making the world a better place Peter Singer does not mince words and you may not like or agree with all of them but they give me pause and make me want to do for the stranger I think this book is going to make a difference in my life That makes it a five star book for me

Download ´ E-book, or Kindle E-pub ¿ Peter Singer

The Life You Can Save Acting Now to End World PovertyEcted to the world's poorest people In The Life You Can Save Singer makes the irrefutable argument that giving will make a huge difference in the lives of others without diminishing the uality of our own This book is an urgent call to action and a hopeful primer on the power of compassion when mixed with rigorous investigation and careful reasoning to lift others out of despa. Probably one of the worst works of Peter Singer In this book he proposes that we should all donate 5% of out annual income if we can or to organizations such as UNICEF and Oxfam to help with poverty relief By stressing the individuals social responsibility of ending poverty he essentially totally misses any reasons for why there exists poverty in the first place by granting global capitalism legitimacy Singer shows the typical data about millions being lifted out of extreme poverty the last 40 years something which is inherently false as the international poverty line is set extremly low making it impossible to avoid malnutrition in many poor countries for example This poverty line has also not been adjusted for inflation as there has been many market crashes which have created poverty since roughly the 80s onwards making it arbitrary Singer doubts that millionaires and companies donates to good causes simply to better their imagery As we've seen with many of these huge donations in the past it has been done directly to build investment and brand loyalty etc Singers main line of everyone donating what they can outright denies structural problems predatory lending to foreign countries and the mechanisms of how large corporations function Corporations always need to increase profits something which can only be done by producing something under the average cost or by cheap or free labour The inherent contradictions here is for Singer non existent Although Singer does makes some good moral points on why we should donate he never seem to realize that ending world poverty and poverty relief are two uite different things In the book he shys away from politics with the exceptions of demanding taxes on the super rich and increasing national spending on foreign aid He essentially tries to solve an inherently political issue outside the realm of politics It is however true that the super rich holds most of the wealth and that with that wealth we could essentially end poverty but this is in direct contradiction with the super rich need for profit The need for profit depends on unemployment and poverty in order to force wages lower in poor countries Without realizing it Singer kindaa supports the problem that he himself sets out to fix