The Singer Solution to World Poverty - Essay Example

Order 354448 Topic: Rhetorical Critique Essay Assignment: "The Singer Solution to World Poverty" By Peter Singer. Introduction: “The existence of inordinately rich people in any society today is a very great evil. Some inadequacies of wealth and income are no doubt natural and functionally justifiable. Excessive wealth and power tends to corrupt even if the rich are not idle rich, even when they work harder than anyone else, they work differently, apply different standards, and are set apart from common humanity. They corrupt themselves by practicing greed and they corrupt the rest of society by provoking envy.” (Schumacher, 1973, Back-matter)The examples/allegory of Dora and Bob given in the essay by Peter Singer support the philosophical viewpoint that the means are as important as the ends. Is grave silence on the part of the affluent justifiable, when millions of children die of malnutrition and hunger in the third-world countries? Rhetorical context or background: Proper investigations about the means need to be made by the individual before embarking upon action, especially when it concerns the life, growth and sentiments of in individual. In the cited example, the apparent intentions of Dora, a retired schoolteacher were not wrong. She must have been just covering up the expenses of living, by writing letters for illiterate people. The windfall of $1000 was quite unexpected. “ All she has to do is persuade a homeless 9-year-old boy to follow her to an address she has been given. (She is told he will be adopted by wealthy foreigners.) She delivers the boy, gets the money, spends some of it on a television set and settles down to enjoy her new acquisition. Her neighbor spoils the fun, however, by telling her that the boy was too old to be adopted —he will be killed and his organs sold for transplantation.” (The Singer....)The important issue here is Dora is aware of such an eventuality and the neighbors view on the subject pierces her conscience. She relents and decides to take the boy back. That is a welcome step, she is ready to face the consequences by taking serious risks. Singer poses a question, what would have the position, if Dora is to ignore the advise and would argue that that is the only choice left for her to acquire a color TV, others have it, the he is the street-kid. People will term her as a monster and they are absolutely right in their judgment. Who the author is: Peter Albert David Singer (born 6 July 1946) is an Australian philosopher. He is the Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University. He specializes in applied ethics, and his approach to ethical issues is from a secular and utilitarian perspective. He founded the Center for Human Bioethics. He contested as a Green candidate for the Australian Senate, but lost. He has been honored as the Australian Humanist of the Year by the Council of Australian Humanist Societies. He was voted as one of Australias most influential intellectuals. He was well-known for his book Animal Liberation. He holds strong views as for mitigating poverty from the face of this earth. He donates 25% of his salary to Oxfam and UNICEF. He argues strongly against absolute poverty. He pleads that it is morally imperative for citizens of developed countries to donate substantially for the cause of the poor. He is aware of the shortcomings and corrupt practices in the implementation of the projects related to poor, but he stands by his original premises about the imperative need to help the poor. Point of view: The pages of human history are full of gory incidents to the deaths of men, women and children because of poverty related illness and malnourishment. Such incidents are on the rise in the present day world impacted by materialistic civilization, internet and industrial revolutions. Peter Singer blames the American consumers for for such happenings and gross inequalities in the society. This is his solid argument elucidated in his essay “The Singer Solution to World Poverty.”The drawback of most of the wealthy is that they think that happiness is a product, an individual achievement. Consumerism threatens to destroy our world. James M. Houston writes, “The commodity mentality breeds self-interest, turning us against each other in suspicion and selfishness. Instead, happiness is the fruit of a gifted life, of goodness received from others, and love given and shared. Happiness can come our way only when we have a strong life in relation ship with others.”(2007, p.10) The human approach, the ethical ways, the moral attitudes and truthful disposition, can solve many issues that threaten to destroy the harmony in the society. One of the top religious leader/philosopher averred, “So far as a single human being is hungry in my country, my whole religion is to feed him.” (Anonymous....) Peter Singer quotes from the 1996 book, Living High and Letting Die, by the New York University Philosopher Peter Unger. The example is imaginary but the conclusion derived from is related to the facts of life. He narrates how Bob failed to save the life of a small child, in preference of his valuable Bugatti car. The child is allowed to die being crushed by the speeding train, and Bob is not willing to sacrifice his joy in owning the car and the guaranteed financial security as its value is appreciating. Peter Singer opines, how people become judgmental about the conduct of others—everybody will condemn Unger. “Bobs conduct, most of us will immediately respond, was gravely wrong. Unger agrees. But then he reminds us that we, too, have opportunities to save the lives of children. We can give to organizations like UNICEF or Oxfam America. How much would we have to give one of these organizations to have a high probability of saving the life of a child threatened by easily preventable diseases?” (The Singer....) Intended audience as I infer it from clue both outside and inside the text: The intended audience is the political leadership, economists, intellectuals, whos who of the society and above all the rich and the wealthy. The approach of the author is more like that of a philanthropist than than a practical individual who sees the issues as they are, and not as they should be. This essay is for the politicians, economists, philanthropists, and in general-it is for the world audience. The Singer Solution to World Poverty is not that simple as has been explained in Bobs story. The important question is, why Americans cut their standards of living to support the breeding of people in third world countries, because it is morally right? Americans work very hard for their money. Why the Americans or any rich man should be blamed for the societal values of the poor countries? Reformation and rehabilitation is required there; it it the responsibly of the leadership to educate the parents, go for family planning if necessary, and strive to raise the standard of living as well as the standard of life. Doles and donations can not be the foundations for building a strong society. Americans pay high taxes to protect their lifestyles. They are the masters of their money. Importantly, American economy is dependent on the surplus spending of the Americans. The interference of millions of Bobs will harm the growth of American economy. What I see as the main points of the work, its purpose, and its supporting details: “Society today is ruled by greed and envy.”(Schumacher, 1973, Back-matter.) Singer is philosophical but has the studied approach to drive home his point of view. He writes,“ In fact, the average family in the United States spends almost one-third of its income on things that are no more necessary to them than Doras new TV was to her. Going out to nice restaurants, buying new clothes because the old ones are no longer stylish, vacationing at beach resorts —so much of our income is spent on things not essential to the preservation of our lives and health. Donated to one of a number of charitable agencies, that money could mean the difference between life and death for children in need.”(The Singer....) Comments on the organization, referring to groups of paragraphs and the overall role they play in the piece. By carefully analyzing Bobs example of inaction to save the life of the boy, Peter Singer compares it to the inaction of super-rich individuals who are not doing anything to save the lives of many millions of children all over the world, who are running on the track of life and the speeding train will finish their life. They are all in the same situation as that of Bob, they have the switch(the money power) to save those children and the silence and inaction on their part is difficult to condone. He compares it to the follow-the crowd ethics of the people of Germany who looked to the other-side when the Nazi atrocities took lives of 6 million Jews and caused untold suffering to many more millions. They are as bad as the actual perpetrators of the crime. Peter Singer has tendered his arguments logically constructing them step by step. They appeal both to reason and emotion of the readers, not only kindle curiosity but move ones spirits to take action immediately. His concern for showing urgency in action is genuine and he earnestly pleads to spare $200 and send it to an overseas aid agency, reach out for the phone and complete the transaction of donation forthwith. If that is not done, the inaction is as bad as that of Bob, as he let the runaway train hurtle towards the innocent child causing its death. Peter Singer has a dig at the psychologists and he writes, “Now, evolutionary psychologists tell us that human nature just isnt sufficiently altruistic to make it plausible that many people will sacrifice so much for strangers. On the facts of human nature, they might be right, but they would be wrong to draw a moral conclusion from those facts.”(The Singer....) “…. according to UNICEF, nearly 10 million children under five years old die each year from causes related to poverty.” (Singer,2009,p.4) Whatever be the arguments, for and against the attitudes related to charity and donations, the problem is too big to be ignored by any right thinking individuals. The rich nations and the UNO agencies need to intervene strongly to take remedial measures. My experience of reading the essay- whether I found it easy, difficult, or confusing and why. If rhetorical appeals to mass charity alone could solve the the issue of poverty, it should have been eradicated from the face of this planet earth, centuries ago, as in every Sunday-sermon, christian fathers, missionaries and preachers preach on the issue. No religion eulogizes or highlights poverty as a desirable virtue. No political or religious philosophy has been able to tackle the issue of poverty. Poverty can only be solved by the poor man, with the determination, grit and hard work, to become rich. Poverty can be solved by twin objectives. One, people need to become basically sound and industrious. Two, basic conditions need to be created for the people to become basically sound and industrious. It is not that part one will be finished first, and part two will follow later. Efforts on both the counts are to be carried out simultaneously. The world today does not lack great projects to attack poverty; the need is of great,efficient and above all, honest and committed individuals that see the poor people not as voters, but as part of humankind that needs support. Conclusion: Peter Singer has put forth his views in his own style. One needs to have a philosophical bent of mind to understand his viewpoint. In the strict sense of economics and the modern day politics, his views may not be totally acceptable. For example, a politician will never like poverty in an enemy country be eliminated and that country become economically strong. Those who believe in the world is one family, like me, will find this essay fascinating tor read. Singer has genuine concern about eradication of poverty and he leads by example. He contributes 25% of his salary for charitable purposes. If every individual follows this principle, there would not be any necessity for Non-governmental and Charitable Organizations to appeal for donations from the industrialists and public. His formula is simple and straightforward. Whatever money youre spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away in charity. ************* Works Cited: Houston, James M. The Fulfillment:Pursuing True Happiness;Victor;2007 Schumacher, E.F. Small is Beautiful; Blond and Briggs Ltd,London; 1977 Singer, Peter. The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty; Random House; First Edition edition, March 3, 2009. The Singer Solution to World Poverty, by Peter Singer Sep 5, 1999 ... Article in The New York Times Sunday Magazine (September 5, 1999, pp.60-63) – Retrieved on January 25, 2010. Read More