Famine, Affluence, and Morality At this point, the question that would naturally arise, from Peter Singer’s article, would be as follows: “How much ought we be giving to famine relief?” In order to answer the above question, Singer refers to his original/main thesis of: “ If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally to do it.” (Singer is now referring to his main thesis as the strong version to the answer, of how much we ought to be giving to famine relief. Singer believes that if we follow the strong version, it would lead wealthy countries and their citizens, to the conclusion that everyone should give what they have to famine relief, until they reach the state of “living at the level of marginal utility.”)1- Explain what Peter Singer means when he claims that wealthy countries and their citizens, should give to famine relief until the point to where they reach the state of “living at the level of marginal utility.” Please explain your answer, in your own words. 2- Do you believe that, “living at the level of marginal utility,” would affect our economy in a negative way? Fully explain the reasoning for your view.
