Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Defending Singer, but With Qualifications. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 6 page essay draws upon sources to offer an argument in defense of Peter Singer's "Famine, Affluence, and Morality," which maintains that Singer is correct in his position that people are morally obligated to aid those who suffer, but the writer also qualifies some of Singer's assumptions and his main conclusion. Bibliography lists 4 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: KL9_khsinger.doc
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
that is controversial, as it maintains that it is not only good to give to charity, individuals have a moral obligation to do so. Signer qualifies the extent to which
charity is a moral obligation only by specifying that if the individual gives to the point of starvation, this also violates the utilitarian moral standard by increasing, rather than decreasing,
the amount of misery in the world. The following examination of Singers position supports his assertions, but it also points out where Singers assumptions are incomplete or inaccurate. Singers
premises are all non-controversial, as no rational individual can argue that starvation and death from lack of the necessities of life is anything but bad. However, the conclusion that Singer
reaches based on these premises is faulty on a number of points. First of all, this examination looks at how correct moral action is defined by utilitarian philosophy and then
describes Singers premises, indicating where scholarship has found flaws in Singers logic and offering opposing positions. This is followed by conclusions that offer support for Singers position, but with qualifications.
Three principal elements comprise the foundation for utilitarian ethics. The first of these factors is the "consequentialist principle" that states that the "rightness or wrongness of an action is
determined by the goodness, or badness, of the results that flow from it" (Colosi 8). The second is the "hedonist principle," which defines "good" as being associated with pleasure and
"bad" as anything causing pain, while the third element is the "principle of extent," which refers to the number of individuals who will be affected by a specific action (Colosi
8). A quintessential statement of utilitarian morality emerges from these principles and this is that: "the rightness of an action is determined by its contribution to the happiness (pleasure) of
...