Ethical Principles

Singer on the Drowning Child

Last week when we read Peter Singer's article "Famine, Affluence, and Morality", we saw that a lot of the load of the argument is carried by premise 2. Our topic for this class is what Singer has to say in support of this premise. His argument in support of premise 2 takes the form of what is called a thought experiment. He describes a hypothetical case in which he thinks that it is obvious what you are morally required to do, and then tries to use that case in order to argue that the right general principle that explains what it is wrong in that case, is articulated by premise 2. There are two topics for the assigned reading for this class. The first of the two is to view some video of Singer explaining the thought experiment here:

Food for Thought

As you read and listen, watch out for places in which Singer tries to debunk the very normal and human feeling that we aren't really required to pitch in to save the lives of strangers far away. Why does Singer think that these thoughts shouldn't be trusted? Another important thing to worry about is whether his thought experiment - the drowning child - is really the same as giving aid to the distant needy. If you think these cases are different, so that you might be required to help the drowning child but not required to help the distant needy, then try to put your finger on exactly what is relevantly different about the two cases.

Wishes of the Dead

The main “reading” assignment for today - think of it as a break after completing your first assignment late last week - is to listen to the podcast episode, ‘Wishes of the Dead’, by Barry Lam of Hi-Phi Nation. As you listen, try to identify where Professor Lam is proposing possible ethical principles that might explain why we ought to follow the wishes of people who establish charitable trusts in perpetuity.

Click here for bonus “Wishes of the Dead” material, including a full transcript.