In the reading from Singer and Harden we see two different sides about our dutie
ID: 3469602 • Letter: I
Question
In the reading from Singer and Harden we see two different sides about our duties to poor people around the globe. Explain both sides. Then explore whose argument is more rationally rigorous and coherent In the reading from Singer and Harden we see two different sides about our duties to poor people around the globe. Explain both sides. Then explore whose argument is more rationally rigorous and coherent In the reading from Singer and Harden we see two different sides about our duties to poor people around the globe. Explain both sides. Then explore whose argument is more rationally rigorous and coherentExplanation / Answer
At first, Hardin’s ethics seems rude and selfish, but as you read further, he makes it clear that the only way to save our world is not to help poor because an average poor country undergoes a 2.5 percent increase in population each year, rich countries 0.8 percent. If the poor countries received no food from the outside, the rate of their population growth will decrease.
He believes, a poor country that needs support needs to learn the hard way, even if that means losing resources or people.
Peter Singer who wrote essays about human poverty questioned whether to confront the issue of poverty or to ignore it. Singer essay contains a much more practical discussion arguing that individual should donate overseas aid organizations to help the impoverished.
Both writers wrote about the poverty but the singer approach is much coherent than Hardin because it talks about humanity rather than solution only.
?