Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”: Three Libertarian Refutations

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Peter Singer’s famous and influential article is criticised in three main ways that can be considered libertarian, although many non-libertarians could also accept them: 1) the relevant moral principle is more plausibly about upholding an implicit contract rather than globalising a moral intuition that had local evolutionary origins; 2) its principle of the immorality of not stopping bad things is paradoxical, as it overlooks the converse aspect that would be the positive morality of not starting bad things and also thereby conceptually eliminates innocence; and 3) free markets—especially international free trade—have been cogently explained to be the real solution to the global “major evils” of “poverty” and “pollution”, while “overpopulation” does not exist in free-market frameworks; hence charity is a relatively minor alleviant to the problem of insufficiently free markets. There are also various subsidiary arguments throughout.
Categories
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LESPSF-2
Revision history
First archival date: 2018-10-29
Latest version: 4 (2020-04-30)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2018-10-29

Total views
277 ( #15,814 of 48,991 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
118 ( #4,354 of 48,991 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.