Peter Singer and his philosophical contributions

Poverty Duty

The Ethic of Hunger

The question of a moral or ethical responsibility towards those who are impoverished has been one of the most long standing debates in human society. Every major religion has some doctrine of caring for the poor, though these of course are subject to myriad interpretations depending on the time and culture. From this fact, however, it might be deduced that there is some innate imperative to help others; that it is a fundamental and universal moral principle to assist those on the brink of starvation with the means -- either in the form of direct sustenance or through monetary gifts that allow the individuals to procure their own food -- of survival. Yet this extrapolation is built only on limited observation, and does not necessarily hold up to a rigorous logical examination. It is possible to see an incumbent ethical and moral duty to alleviate hunger, however, using a fairly standard ethical theory.

The basic precept of the Utilitarian ethic is "the greatest good for the greatest number." It should be immediately apparent that this creates an ethical imperative for one who has surplus food -- or means of procuring food -- to give some of that food (or some of the means of procuring food) to an individual that does not have a sufficient amount to eat. If this is not immediately apparent, it can be made so by a brief examination of the utility of various acts. For instance, I will certainly get a great deal of utility from my morning latte, which (with tip included, of course) costs me five dollars. Not only is there caloric value (i.e. It staves off hunger), but I also enjoy it immensely. That same five dollars, however, could be used to buy a fully-cooked roast chicken at the grocery store, which if given to a hungry family of four will provide them with a mediocre meal that they will derive far more utility from, in both calories and enjoyment (or at least relief from suffering).

According to the pure mathematics of utilitarianism, then, there is very little debate regarding this issue. No matter what the circumstance, a person who is experiencing true biologically-driven hunger due to a lack of enough food to eat will get far more utility out of the most basic morsel of nutrition and substance that could be achieved by the most magnificent meal for those who are used to plenty (and this comparison is even unfair, as the magnificent meal could be traded to feed that many more hungry people). It is an ethical duty, then, for those of us privileged enough to have plenty to share it with those who do not have enough.