Moral limits on the demands of beneficence?

Abstract

If you came upon a small child drowning in a pond, you ought to save the child even at considerable cost and risk to yourself. In 1972 Peter Singer observed that inhabitants of affluent industrialized societies stand in exactly the same relationship to the millions of poor inhabitants of poor undeveloped societies that you would stand to the small child drowning in the example just given. Given that you ought to help the drowning child, by parity of reasoning we ought to help the impoverished needy persons around the globe. To capture this intuition Singer proposed this principle of benevolence: If one can prevent some significant bad from occurring, without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, one ought morally to do so.1 Premature death caused by preventable disease, injury, and poverty is uncontroversially a significant bad. Donations to charitable organizations such as Oxfam can prevent many of these deaths around the world, so Singer’s principle holds that we ought to donate (or take some action that is comparably efficient at saving lives).

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,774

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
192 (#18,419)

6 months
192 (#104,208)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Richard J. Arneson
University of California, San Diego

References found in this work

Famine, affluence, and morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (3):229-243.
Selflessness and the loss of self.Jean Hampton - 1993 - Social Philosophy and Policy 10 (1):135-65.
The demands of beneficence.Liam Murphy - 1993 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 22 (4):267-292.

Add more references