Should People Living in more Affluent Countries Have the Moral Obligation to Provide for the Poor in Other Parts of the World

In this article, I will pay attention to the article by Peter Singer's thesis "famine, prosperity, and morality". . First I will outline the basic premise of Singer 's claim to support this moral obligation and whether it is a reasonable argument. Secondly, in his paper 'Living on Lifeboats' claiming that it is more important to protect your own interests, you will see another view of Garrett Harding. downfall.

Moral obligation is a controversial matter. We currently live in "an adequate world", but the number of people who die of starvation, malnutrition or illness is staggering. In this article, especially if I consider Singer 's views on this issue, I will study arguments against and against the moral obligation to help poor people and starvation. "Are there any obligations or moral responsibilities for those who live in other countries? - Response to tragic and difficult problems. Given this tragic situation, the moral obligation here It is a very difficult decision, the document over ten years is very powerful and rewarding, but because it brings tears to my eyes, I can not imagine what Wolf will experience.

New Yorker magazine states that Peter Singer is the most influential and living philosopher in the world. He painted the theme of his epoch-making essay "Famine, Prosperity and Morality", and they said the same moral obligations as those far away as they are closer to those who are close I claimed to have it. 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. Singer believes that both the group and the individual are responsible for helping those who need assistance.

Focusing on our wealthy society will cause a nasty ethical dilemma. The extreme contrast between homeless people and ordinary people in wealthy societies is so sharp that it seems to merely consider this gap of welfare as an incidental loss. This is an unexpected side effect of the socioeconomic system. We live, and roughly capitalism is bound by the welfare state where individual rights and rapidly extinct.