Chapter 3: Common Objections to Giving Matias Beeck & Ari Pompas

Summary As the title suggests, this chapter covers the common objections people would have and the arguments many people would make towards giving aid. Throughout the chapter Singer presents these objections/arguments and refutes them.

Major Argument Despite the objections people have or arguments they make, people should still give. People give multiple reasons/excuses for not giving, but the majority of these reasons are not good enough to justify not giving.

Common Objections People work for their money and they have the right to spend it on themselves All people are entitled to follow their own beliefs We don’t owe anything to someone we have done nothing wrong to Giving money away will reduce future growth This is not fair to say because people are born into different financial opportunity. Some are more fortunate than others with the place they end up working in. We cannot ignore moral relativism We still have a responsibility to those in need and there are many ways in which we hurt the poor that go unnoticed. Growth is based on your investment abilities. You can still give at some points.

Quotes “Charity begins at home” (24). “Social capital” is responsible for at least 90% of what people earn in wealthy societies (26). – Herbert Simon “But we could still think that to choose to do these things rather than use the money to save human lives is wrong, shows a deplorable lack of empathy, and means that you are not a good person” (27). “You are causing aggression to us by causing global warming” (32). Facts In the U.S., charitable giving is around 2.2% of gross national income (23). U.S. ranks as the world’s 3 rd most generous nation (23). In 2006, the U.S. fell behind Portugal and Italy, leaving Greece as the only industrialized country to give a smaller percentage of its national income in foreign aid (33). “Just two percent of the world’s people own half the world’s wealth, and the richest 10% own 85% of the wealth. In contrast, half the world’s people have barely 1% of the world’s assets to split among them” (29).

Discussion Question “We are certainly responsible for evils we inflict on others, no matter where, and we owe those people compensation…Nevertheless, I have seen no plausible argument that we owe something, as a matter of general duty, to those to whom we have done nothing wrong” (28). – Canadian Philosopher Jan Narveson Even if we as individuals have not done anything wrong to the people in need, is it our moral obligation to help them? Why or why not?