What struck me about Singer’s arguments was that the amount in question, for him, wasn’t theoretical. It was calculable. There is an amount of money one needs to live a decent life—to pay for a reasonable amount of rent, clothes, food, and leisure. And if you have more than that amount, he posited, you should give it away—because you don’t need it, and someone else does.
Michael Schur on Peter Singer’s Moral Challenge to the Rest of Us
by
TLYCS Admin
| 9 Jan 2020
Share this story:
Related stories:
New Ice-Creamery Fluffy Torpedo Is Outstanding, Outlandish and Straight Out of Your Childhood Dreams
The floor is quite literally paved with sour-strap lollies. The flavours include grape Aeroplane Jelly, Vegemite-white choc... Read more >
PETER SINGER – Effective Altruism, Animal Liberation, & Living an Ethical Life
A Rick Roll Podcast with Peter Singer How do you live a truly ethical life? Furthermore, what are the ethical obligations w... Read more >
Categories:
- Agriculture and Farming
- Books
- Children
- Economic Development
- Education
- Effective Giving
- Environment
- Events
- Finding Fulfillment from Giving
- Friends and Family
- Fundraising
- Giving Games
- Giving Pledge
- Health and Infectious Diseases
- Hunger and Nutrition
- In The News
- Marketing
- Millennials
- Partnerships
- Peter Singer
- Philanthropy Education
- Refugees
- Religion
- Research and Evidence
- Setting and Achieving Giving Goals
- Social Media
- The Life You Can Save book
- Uncategorized
- Water and Sanitation
- Women and Girls
- Yearend Giving
