Peter Singer and Moral Decisions

Singer explained the reasons for reasoning by providing thinking experiments to readers in a book "Living alive and letting people die." In the experiment, a scene was proposed in which the child was on the track of the train and the train was facing him. Now, a man named Bob has the opportunity to save her. In order to do this, he had to switch the train by throwing a switch. But by doing so, he will also destroy his precious and expensive Bugatti. This car is also his future investment.

New Yorker magazine states that Peter Singer is the most influential and living philosopher in the world. He cites the subject of his epoch-making essay "famine, prosperity and morality" and claims that people have the same moral obligation to people far away from them. What are our obligations to people who need it so much? The governments and individuals of the Western countries focused on this issue, mainly on the responsibilities each country should bear to immigrants and asylum seekers, and whether Western democracy should intervene to end these remote conflicts I am faced more and more. People are running away

In 1972, a young philosopher Peter Singer announced "famine, prosperity and morality" and quickly became one of the most widely discussed papers in applied ethics. Throughout this article, Singer expressed his view that we have the same moral obligation as those far from us. We believe that choosing not to send lives to the hungry people on the other side of the earth is morally equivalent to ignoring drowning children. If we can help, we have to do - and any excuses are hypocritical. Shin's extreme position on the moral obligation to others has been a call for powerful weapons and continues to challenge people's attitude towards extreme poverty. Today is also the central presence of a man who thinks that we should help other people than us.

• Because nearly 1 billion people are suffering from extreme poverty, who is morally responsible for meeting their basic needs? Ethicalist Peter Singer wrote, "There is no strong reason to prioritize the interests of our fellows when receiving the test of impartiality, beyond our obligation, reasons to not pay the price There is no "It really plays an absolutely important role in the happiness of others who need it. Do you agree to Singer that the place of poverty is not morally important?