Analysis of Argument to The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty (Chapter II) - Book Report/Review Example

The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty Chapter Two: Is It Good to Help? In his book The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty, Peter Singer expresses his persuasive intention of encouraging people to reflect on the need to help. In most cases, help is considered ethical, especially if the efforts will reduce serious pain and suffering in society. In chapter two of the book, Singer implies that the impacts of help should not be quantified in terms of damages because life is more precious than material wealth. Nevertheless, the author indicates that the need to help may be hindered by certain internal factors. The individual attributes are mostly attached to the value of a property at stake, and which can be used to help out those in need, hence the “wrongful” essence of helping. Nonetheless, Singer attempts to persuade the readers that happiness is inexorably within the people who are ready to help. In this chapter, Singer presents what boils down to the decisions made by the rich, by indicating that their property comes first and the lives of the innocent second. The author uses syllogisms to explain that Bob is almost reaching the age of retirement and has used most of the resources he has saved in his life to buy a very unique and expensive old car, a Bugatti. Although Bob’s car is yet to be insured, the Bugatti is what he counts as the greatest achievement of his life. Apparently, the lack of insurance cover for the car eliminates the question of a possible compensation should an accident take place, hence his syllogistic reasoning to avoid such incidents at any cost. Nonetheless, in addition to the fascination that Bob enjoys from driving and servicing it, Singer uses direct, concise claims supported by reasoning to explain how Bob is optimistic that the car’s market value will be good news to him. He intends to put it up for sale and use the money to lead a comfortable life after he retires. Nonetheless, the philosopher crafts a tricky scenario to test Bob’s ability to help. One day Bob parks the car close to a railway line and strolls up the hill when he sees a train, loose and with no one inside, descending down the railway line. Looking down the direction where the train was headed, he spots the tiny image of a young person who seems to be mesmerized by play on the railway line. But thinking of the happiness the car had brought him and its monetary value if he helped to save the child’s life, Bob chooses his car over the life of the child. Singer tacitly presents Bob’s objections to helping by implying that the decision may have been influenced by the lack of insurance cover for the property; uninsured property does not stand for compensation in case of any damages. In a real life situation, however, Singer implies that when confronted with a tricky scenario in which the life of an innocent person or property is at stake, the life of the vulnerable can be sacrificed by the rich, and he objects to that in ethical sense. Apart from Bob’s story, this chapter exposes how much an individual can be willing to cede in order to lessen the pain of a victim whose life is not really in danger. The writer uses an emotional appeal to the motorist driving an expensive car down the road, that his failure to act timely could cost the hiker his leg. The strategy of presenting these experiences in a scenario makes it interesting to observe how the wealthy value material wealth more than human welfare. In the mentioned example, the motorist has just spent a fortune to replace the old car seats with new bright-colored ones that can be stained with the slightest touch of dirt. The victim, on the other hand, cries out for help but has his leg soaked in blood – an inevitable stain. Nevertheless, by presenting this tricky scenario, Singer manages to pull the “heartstrings” of the rich to be more empathetic and ethical in order to lessen the pain and suffering that the helpless in the community are enduring. Finally, Singer presents the Charity work vs. Misappropriation scenario in which case he avers that the donors are sometimes troubled by the misuse of donor funds. Although savings and investments are important facets of comfortable life in retirement, the author implies that “absolute” saving might be regarded as being unwilling to help the disadvantaged in a society. For in accumulating wealth for use when one is a geriatric and out of employment, most people successfully refuse to channel that money to advance charitable causes. On the other hand, he raises an objection by arguing syllogistically that those who set aside funds for their own interests may have witnessed or at least learned of misappropriation of the aid, hence the need to accumulate the money and resources for their own benefit when they become retirees. Why then is saving for a happy retirement regarded to be bad? Despite the significance of ethics in helping others, Singer raises the re-surfacing objections in the form of uncertainty about the outcomes of self-sacrifices, hence implying the need of being accountable on expenditures to win back the hearts of the donors. My argument The above cases reveal the real cry of the weak in society through the use of syllogisms and tricky but real scenarios. Peter Singer uses direct, short claims reinforced by reasoning. The chapter summarizes the need for the better-placed members of a society to help the weak, especially when they are in danger and no other ready source of help is available for them. Singer, however, indicates that this has not always been the case. What persuades me in the chapter is that Singer’s arguments and strategies lay bare the ethical dilemmas faced by the rich in a society, which they “solve” in unfortunate ways, by sacrificing the vulnerable lives and advancing unethical hedonistic goals. Works Cited Singer, Peter. The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty. New York: Pan MacMillan, 2010. Print. Read More