Taking Hunger Seriously: Are YOU Morally Obligated to Help Desperately Poor Children

1
Taking Hunger Seriously Are YOU Morally
Obligated to Help Desperately Poor Children?

• Nathan Nobis, Ph.D.
• aphilosopher_at_gmail.com, www.NathanNobis.com

2
Media Coverage

• Time magazine cover stories
• National TV News
• Live 8 concerts
• Bono from U2
• Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

3
Philosophical Coverage
4
(No Transcript)
5
Why Is there an Issue?Facts About Hunger
Poverty

• 1.2 billion people live in absolute poverty, a
  condition of life so characterized by
  malnutrition, illiteracy, disease, squalid
  surroundings, high infant mortality and low life
  expectancy as to be beneath any reasonably
  definition of human decency (Robert McNamara,
  World Bank).
• Six million children--and even more adults--die
  unnecessarily every year. Good people all over
  the world are doing their best to save them. You
  can too (TIME magazine, Nov. 7, 2005)
• 16,000 a day 700 an hour 12 a minute!

6
Why Is there an Issue?Facts About Hunger
Poverty

• Deaths from malnutrition and untreated
  poverty-related disease
• 19 dehydrating effects of chronic diarrhea
  prevented by oral re-hydration salts (cost per
  packet 15 cents).
• 19 acute respiratory infections, saved with
  antibiotics (cost 25 cents).
• measles vitamin A therapy (cost per capsule
  less than 10 cents) or measles vaccine (cost 17
  per vaccine) to prevent it.

7
Singers conclusion, which he gives reasons for

• You are morally obligated to donate to
  famine-relief and absolute poverty-relief
  organizations your not giving is morally wrong.
• Assumption your basic needs are met probably,
  you spend a fair amount on luxuries. Directed
  towards you, not just other people.
• How much ?!?
• Singer says substantial amounts, until your
  giving would be a significant sacrifice donate
  whatever is left after necessities and you
  would spend on luxuries. ???
• How about we first focus on whether we might be
  obligated to give something? .25/day? 10 a
  month?

8
Three Cases involving Moral Choices

• The Fountain
• Dora and the TV
• Bob and the Bugatti
• We will use these cases (thought experiments
  and what you (or, at least many people) think
  about them, to develop an argument for Singers
  conclusion.
• From The Singer Solution to World Poverty, NY
  Times, Sept. 5, 1999

9
Case 1. You at the FountainWhat would be right
to do?
10
Ambiguity in morally right

• Morally right can mean
• (1) morally permissible, i.e., OK to do, not
  wrong, not impermissible, or
• (2) morally obligatory, i.e., that you are
  morally required to do the action that if you
  dont do it, you are doing something wrong,
  something morally impermissible.
• What did you mean?
• Is saving the child merely permissible,
• or is it morally obligatory?

11
Or, you at the pond
12
Case 2. Dora the Organ-Peddlers

• Morally, what should Dora do? Is she obligated to
  save the child, or not?

13
Case 3Bob and the Bugatti

• Morally, what should Bob do? Is he obligated to
  save the child, or not?

14
Three Cases What did YOU think about them?
15
What many people think

• In each case, the child should be saved. You,
  Dora and Bob are morally obligated to save the
  child. Its not just nice to save the child if
  you dont do it, youve done something wrong!
• (You might disagree, especially about Bob. Well
  talk about that in a bit!)
• Question What reasons can be given in favor of
  this view? Make a list!

16
Some common reasons, defenses

• If I were the child (or he/she were my child),
  Id want to be saved . . .
• Lives are more important or valuable than
  material things and comforts. . .
• The harms to the child (death!) are much greater
  than the harms to the rescuer (getting wet,
  losing TV or even a whole retirement fund). . .
• Id feel guilty! Not the best reason because
• (a) why would you feel guilty? Because youd
  think you did something wrong see above for
  reasons why! and
• (b) what if someone didnt feel guilty would
  that make his or her letting the child die
  morally ok?

17
Singers proposed moral principle

• If there are (a) very bad things happening, (b)
  there is something that we can do that will
  prevent some of these bad things from happening
  and (c) we can do these things without
  sacrificing something of comparable moral
  significance, then we are morally obligated to do
  so (and its wrong not to).
• Why accept this principle? . . .
• What if you rejected this principle? . . .

18
The argument

• If there are (a) very bad things happening, (b)
  there is something that we can do that will
  prevent some of these bad things from happening
  and (c) we can do these things without
  sacrificing something of comparable moral
  significance, then we are morally obligated to do
  so.
• (a) There are very bad things happening (e.g.,
  children starving, etc.)
• (b) We can do something to prevent some of these
  bad things from happening (e.g., by donating).
• (c) In doing this, we wouldnt sacrifice
  something of comparable moral significance.
• Therefore, we are morally obligated to donate
  (and its wrong not to).

19
Summary of argument from Dan Rather interview on
60 Minutes
20
Some Common Objections

• If there are (a) very bad things happening, (b)
  there is something that we can do that will
  prevent some of these bad things from happening
  and (c) we can do these things without
  sacrificing something of comparable moral
  significance, then we are morally obligated to do
  so.
• (a) There are very bad things happening (e.g.,
  children starving, etc.)
• (b) We can do something to prevent some of these
  bad things from happening (e.g., by donating).
• (c) In doing this, we wouldnt sacrifice
  something of comparable moral significance.
• Therefore, we are morally obligated to donate
  (and its wrong not to).
• If the argument is not sound, why? The arguments
  conclusion follows logically from the premises
  (i.e., the argument is logically valid), so if
  theres a problem, its that a premise is false.

21
Objection 1 Hypocrisy!

• Singer doesnt perfectly practice what he
  preaches, so his argument is not sound!
• 1. The person who gives this argument does not
  give away all (or even more than 20!) to
  famine/disaster aid.
• 2. Therefore, I (or we) am not morally obligated
  to help and Singers argument is unsound.
• Theres a missing, false assumption here

22
Objection 1 Hypocrisy! (cont)

• Adding the missing assumed premise to make the
  argument logically valid
• 1. The person who gives this argument does not
  give away all (or even more than 20!) to
  famine/disaster aid. (T)
• 2. If someone says you are morally obligated to
  do something, but that person does not always or
  perfectly do that thing, then its not true that
  you are obligated do that thing.
• 3. Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• But premise (2) is false. Counterexample?

23
Objection 2 Others Arent Helping!

• Very few people give anything, much less a lot,
  to help starving people. T
• Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• Theres a missing, false assumption here

24
Objection 2 Others Arent Helping! (cont)

• Adding the missing, assumed premise to make the
  argument logically valid
• Very few people give anything, much less a lot,
  to help starving people. T
• If very few people are doing some action, then I
  am not obligated to do it.
• Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• But premise (2) is false. Counterexample?

25
At the Fountain with your lazy friends!
26
Objection 3 If everyone contributed

• If everyone helped out, I wouldnt have to give
  very much, so I dont have to give very much! I
  only have to contribute what would be needed if
  everyone else contributed their fair share!

27
Objection 3 If everyone contributed (cont)

• In cases where a group effort could solve a
  problem, I am only obligated to contribute what
  would be needed if everyone were doing their
  part.
• This is a case where a group effort could solve
  the problem. True?
• Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help
  (beyond, say, 1 or so!).
• But premise (2) is false counterexample?

28
Pulling someone heavy from the fountain
29
Objection 4 Its the job of governments!

• Its the governments responsibility they
  arent doing what they are supposed to, so I
  dont have to help!
• Governments are responsible for assuring
• that people have food and basic medical care.
• 2. Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• Adding the missing premise to make the argument
  valid
• Governments are responsible for assuring that
  people have food and basic medical care.
• If governments are not doing what they are
  supposed to do, then I am never morally obligated
  to assist.
• 3. Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help
• But premise (2) is false counterexample?

30
Objection 5 The child is a stranger

• 1. In these cases, the person in need is a
  stranger.
• 2. Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
  
• Adding the missing premise to make the argument
  valid
• In these cases, the person in need is a stranger.
  T
• If someone in need is a stranger, then you are
  never morally obligated to help them.
• 3. Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• But premise (2) is false counterexample?

31
Objection 6 The child is a far away

• In these cases (unlike the Fountain, Dora Bob),
  the person in need is far away and I/we dont see
  them.
• Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• Adding the missing premise to make the argument
  valid
• 1. The person in need is far away and I dont see
  them. T
• 2. If someone is far away and you dont see them,
  then you are never morally obligated to help
  them.
• 3. Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• But premise (2) is false counterexample!

32
Objection 7 I/we did not cause their problem!

• I/we did not cause their problems.
• Therefore, I (or we) am not obligated to help.
• Adding the missing premise to make the argument
  valid
• I/we did not cause their problems. ?
• If we do not cause someones problem, then we are
  never morally obligated to help them.
• Therefore, we are not morally obligated to help.
• But premise (2) is false counterexample?

33
Objection (observation?) 8People will not
accept this argument. .

• People will not accept this argument they wont
  accept the conclusion and do what Singer says
  they should. T? F?
• For any topic, if people wont accept some
  conclusion or follow it, then that conclusion is
  false or the argument for it unsound.
• Therefore, Singers conclusion is false or the
  argument for it unsound.
• But premise (2) is false. Why?

34
Objection 9 We Cant Help!?

• Premise 3 that we can do something to prevent
  some of these bad things from happening (e.g., by
  donating) is false because
• Helping these people will only make things worse
  for them.
• If true, then we are not obligated to help. But
  why think this always true?
• Anything we would donate would never make it to
  them.
• If true, then we are not obligated to help. But
  why think this always true?

35
Objection 10 The Fatal Objection from
Opportunity Costs for doing GOOD

• Singer says that in donating to help save
  starving children, we wouldnt sacrifice
  something of comparable moral significance.
• Is this true? Need honest answers.
• Honesty suggests that many of the things we
  routinely spend money on are not as significant
  or valuable as childrens lives.

36
Objection 10 The Fatal Objection from
Opportunity Costs for doing GOOD

• However,
• If you donate X to Oxfam, thats X less that
  you could (and would) donate to any other cause.
• Are there any other causes of comparable moral
  significance, anything as bad and as worthy of
  concern?
• Possible causes? _____________________________
• If there are, then giving to starving children is
  not, contrary to Singers argument, morally
  obligatory. His argument is unsound.

37
Not so easy! Not so fast!

• This response concedes that we can do good for
  others, and that we should, but gives us a wider
  range of morally acceptable options.
• The only morally impermissible option would be
  doing nothing.
• So what could you do? What should you do?

38
The Ten Dollar Club .org
39
World On Fire. ca