https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVl5kMXz1vA

Watching philosophy video by Youtuber Jeffrey Kaplan about the essay Famine, Affluence, and Morality (1972) by Peter Singer.

In the paper, Singer claims that if you live in a capitalistic country in the 21st century, you are an evil person because you have an obligatory moral requirement to donate money to relief agencies that can save lives that you would otherwise spend on luxuries.

• Supererogatory: Something "extra" that you are not required to do. It might be nice or good to do something extra, but you don't need to.
• Obligatory: Something that you are required to do, that you must do.
• Because charity is considered as a supererogatory act, people don't think it is bad to not give.

The argument rests on four main points:

• If it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without sacrificing anything of moral significance, then we are obliged to do it.
• Hunger, disease, and other sources of suffering, disability, and death are very bad.
• Luxuries that we spend money on are not of moral significance.
• By donating money to relief agencies, we could prevent very bad things from happening.

Therefore, we must donate the money that we would otherwise spend on luxuries to relief agencies instead.

There are some objections which are proactively countered:

• You might say that since the very bad things are happening far away, you don't need to feel bad for not stepping in. Singer argues that proximity is not a good excuse, because distance no longer a factor in preventing you from knowing or from being able to do something about it.
• You might say that since others can do something about the very bad thing, that you don't need to feel bad for not stepping in. Singer argues that if no one else steps in to prevent the very bad thing from happening and you know that they won't, then the obligation falls to you. Just because others are present, it doesn't excuse you from the obligation.
• You might say that having this obligation is too demanding. Singer says that just because you don't like the conclusion doesn't make it false. You must help if you can.
• You might say that these relief agencies do not fix the problem permenantly; there may always be another famine in the future. Singer points out that famines are going to happen one way or another and by donating money today, you save the lives of specific people. And not helping someone just because they could need help again later would seem incredibly callous.