overty is one of the major problems facing many people and it is as a result of several factors which are independent of each other. In many countries, there is a big gap that exists between the poor and the rich. There is the tendency that the poor will become poorer while the rich get richer. This is a result of the differentiated social classes that are in existence. Even though there are rich people around the world, those that are poor are seen to be many. A small proportion of individuals around the world may be considered to be rich whilst a bigger percentage of individuals live below the standard level and as such considered as poor . The developing countries are one of the countries that have big gaps between the rich and the poor. This is as a result of corruption as well as lack of employment for many. Due to the existence of this problem of poverty, there have been efforts to ensure that it is reduced. Some of the measures taken include provision of employment, and also the formulation of policies that would ensure poverty is eliminated and reduced around the world. Many scholars have looked at the issue on poverty have theorised some of the ways in which poverty can be eradicated . Some of these theories have been put in place so as to act towards the reduction of poverty. The following paper would look at how poverty can be eradicated in reference to two arguments. We will look at the argument by Peter Singer which is The Singer Solution to World Poverty which in this case I am in agreement with and we would also consider Ayn Rand’s case showing how I object it.
The Singer Solution to World poverty advocates for those who are better off in the society to donate to those that are poor through organizations put forward to help the poor. I do adopt this theory since doing well to others when you have the ability to do so plays a big part in reducing poverty . Singer bases his argument on several factors and he points out several factors in regards to helping and not helping the needy. The following are some of the major arguments he puts forward;
It would be wrong if one has the power and ability to prevent a negative occurrence from happening without putting in line anything as important. Humanity plays a big part in this case and therefore individuals should be considerate, especially if they are in a position to help.
It is not good for an individual to suffer and die from lack of food, shelter, and medical care while you live a luxurious life.
Anyone having the power and ability to donate and they do not do so may be said to be doing something wrong.
Those having ability and power can donate to aid agencies, thus preventing suffering and death without themselves having to sacrifice nearly as important.
Singer basically puts this in a more straight forward manner and he elaborates this by giving real life examples. One of the examples is in Bob’s case where he had the option of either saving the life of a child from being knocked by a train or saving his car. For him, he did not consider the life of the child, but he valued his car more. The result was that he remained with his car and continued to enjoy its services and the boy died. In such a case, Bob was not human enough to consider saving a life i.e. doing good to others. Singer is against such acts and he therefore points out that it is of importance to help the needy out and in our case here those that are poor . Bob is seen to have the ability to help but he is unwilling and selfish. Putting this case in our today world’s situation, poverty would be eliminated if each and every individual having the ability and power to donate to aid agencies does so.
Contrary to this, Rand argues in a somewhat opposite manner. According to Rand’s argument, it is never rational for one to sacrifice what they value more for what they value less. Bob acted in line with this theory due to the fact that he saved what he valued most i.e. his car and left the child to die due to the fact that he valued him less. Rand goes further to state that it may be rational and morally acceptable to act to benefit others (just like what Singer advocates for); but that is only due to the fact that you tend to value them. He therefore objects that people ought to help others, especially in the case of strangers. Rand’s view is also referred to as the view of objectivism . Rand puts forward some interesting points which are seen to oppose Singer’s argument. According to him, if an individual accepts the ethics of altruism i.e. Singer’s view, they would suffer several consequences inclusive of the following;
Lack of respect for others-this comes into play in the case that they when one helps others they view them as beggars and as such they tend to undermine them.
Lack of self-esteem-Rand argues that individuals who accept altruism tend to firstly concern themselves with how to sacrifice themselves rather than how to live their lives.
A nightmare view of existence where disasters are constant in their lives.
Philosophers may tend to disagree in terms of their arguments and each one would have their own explanation in regards to their view. As stated earlier, altruism or Singer’s argument that people ought to help the needy through donations may be seen by others to be good while others may view it to be bad due to their own reasons. Due to such differences, we may say that it would be essence for individuals to weigh which arguments benefit them the most and at the same time benefit others. The main aim is to eradicate poverty and in the sense of the two arguments provided, Singer’s argument is seen to be superior to Rand’s argument. Rand’s view may be seen to widen the gap between the rich and the poor. Rand objects Singer’s view basing his argument mainly on one major aspect that relates to Singer’s argument which is sacrifice . He firstly states that one ought to act in accordance with their own hierarchy of values and they should never sacrifice a greater value for a lesser one. This is said to apply in all cases inclusive of an individual’s actions towards other men. In accordance to the hierarchy of values, objectivism propels a person towards achieving their own happiness and also pointing out that your money is yours and you can use it to save those you love and buy what you want since it is your moral right and your rational , moral choice. Rand point out that selflessness come in when one helps a stranger but helping out the one you love may be said to be integrity . This is loyalty to ones values and convictions. This also comes into play in the case of friendship. Rand argues out that help can be given out but only in the case of metaphysical emergencies. He points out that man has to maintain his life through own efforts by working.
Even though Rand tries to explain his argument out that helping out individuals is not in accordance to individual’s virtues, I have the view that Singers view is far much important in terms of the objective of eradicating poverty. It is a fact that people should work so as to sustain themselves and provide for themselves, but it is also logical to help individuals who find themselves in a position where they cannot provide for themselves the basic need. There are several misconceptions that are brought up by Rand’s argument. Firstly, the misconception that the individual donating would lack respect and undermine those that he donates to. People usually donate in order to make someone better off than they were. Donations are not only in terms of money, but also in terms of clothing as well as beddings among other. Donating such things as clothes would ensure that those who are not able to afford to buy the clothes are able to have clothing . More so, donations through aid agencies does not point to specific individuals and as such undermining an individual would not be easy since there is no specific person that benefits from your donation but it benefits many. Secondly, there is the misconception that if you apply Singer’s theory you would lack self-esteem due to the point that you will be sacrificing so as to help others rather than concerning yourself with your own things. This is not true because donations are not done out of sacrifices made but out of will when you have the ability. Therefore, it should be understood that donations are made when one has the ability and has the will and not because they have sacrificed themselves. In addition, one may find themselves in poverty due to natural calamities such as floods and famine. In such a case, donations are of essence so as to ensure that in the short term they are provided with basic needs before they are able to sustain themselves like they were doing before.
In conclusion, Singer’s argument on the solution to world poverty may be seen to be effective in the eradication of poverty. Individuals ought to donate what they can to aid agencies so that those that are unable to provide some of the basic needs for themselves are helped out. Poverty will only be eliminated if people have the will to help out where they can. Helping out may result to the individuals finding ways to sustain themselves to some extent. Individuals would remain in the vicious circle of poverty unless such measures as those advocated by Singer are put into consideration.
References
Archer, M. S. (2015). Generative Mechanisms Transforming the Social Order. London: Springer.
Ayn Rand, . B. (1965). The virtue of selfishness: a new concept of egoism. London: Greenwood Publishers.
Ayn Rand, . B. (1988). The Ayn Rand Lexicon: Objectivism from A to Z. London: John Wiley and Sons.
Barbara MacKinnon, . F. (2014). Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues. New Jersey: Cengage Learning.
Joel Feinberg, . S.-L. (2013). Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy. New York: Cengage Learning.
Kupe, A. (2012). Global Responsibilities: Who Must Deliver on Human Rights? New York: Routledge.
Michael Barnett, . G. (2008). Humanitarianism in Question: Politics, Power, Ethics. London: Oxford.
Muller, G. H. (2016). The New World Reader. London: Cengage Learning.
Singer, P. (2010). The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty. London: Blackwell Publishers.
Smith, T. (2006). Ayn Rand's Normative Ethics: The Virtuous Egoist . London: Cambridge University Press.
