Intro to Ethics- The baby in the pond intro

Introduction to Singer's Argument

• Overview of the motivation behind Singer's argument.

• Introduces a case that illustrates a moral dilemma related to obligation and responsibility.

The Case of the Drowning Child

• Setting: Walking through a rural area, specifically Davy Crockett National Forest.

  • Description of the forest as an ideal hiking location with little human traffic.

  • Imagery of being off the beaten path enhances the isolation.

• Scenario: Encountering a very young child (5-6 months old) drowning in a shallow pond.

  • Child's inability to save itself emphasizes urgency.

  • The pond is shallow (2 feet deep) and near the shore (10 feet away).

• Cost to the individual:

  • Ruining a pair of suede shoes valued at $50.

  • Gaining wet pants and discomfort versus saving a child's life.

Moral Obligation

• The question posed: Do you have a moral obligation to save the child?

  • Consensus that failing to save the child is morally wrong.

  • Accusation of being a bad person for not intervening.

• Comparison to the larger issue of global poverty and starvation.

  • Many children die without assistance globally, often at low costs and with simple solutions.

The Broader Implications

• Discussion of the vast number of people suffering from preventable causes like diarrhea or hunger.

  • Simple and cheap solutions available (e.g., over-the-counter drugs, food donations).

• The underlying question: What is the moral difference between saving the child and helping someone in need elsewhere?

  • Recognition that the same level of obligation should apply regardless of distance or circumstance.

Questions for Consideration

1. Does distance matter?

   • Distance from someone in need raised as a potential moral consideration.

   • However, the relevance of distance is challenged, particularly with modern technology facilitating aid.

2. Does the number of potential helpers matter?

   • Examination of whether numerous others can help affects moral obligation.

   • Distinction drawn between the child who absolutely requires help and the myriad potential recipients of aid.

Assessment of Moral Obligations

• Distance alone does not negate moral responsibility to act.

• The presence of others who could help does not relieve individual obligation.

  • Even with other potential helpers, the personal ability to save a life remains paramount in determining moral action.

• Realization that failing to act in either scenario (saving a child or donating) carries equal moral weight.

• Action necessary in both situations leads to a conclusion: obligation to donate equivalent to obligation to save the child directly.

Conclusion

• Singer’s argument extending the moral obligation to not just direct saving of lives but to donation as well.

• Provokes discomfort and offers a compelling ethical perspective on global responsibility.

• Emphasis on a moral duty to donate as a means of alleviating suffering, akin to the direct obligation to save a drowning child.

• Future discussions to explore the power and possible weaknesses of Singer’s argument.