The most good you can do
A response to the commentaries
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12893257 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Peter Singer (0000-0003-3741-4314, Princeton University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 161-169 |
| Publication date | 2016-05-03 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Global Ethics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1744-9626 • E-ISSN: 1744-9634 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/17449626.2016.1191523 |
| OpenAlex | W2526298678 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 6 |
Anthony Skelton, Violetta Igneski and Tracy Isaacs share my view that our obligations to help people in extreme poverty go beyond what is conventionally accepted. Nevertheless, the other contributors argue that my view is too demanding, while noting some tensions between my different writings on this issue. I explain my position, drawing on Sidgwick’s distinction between what someone ought to do, and what we should praise or blame someone for doing or not doing. I also respond to the position that Skelton considers preferable to mine, drawing this time on an argument that Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek and I have made in our recent book, The Point of View of the Universe. I also address Igneski’s concerns about gender inequality, and indicate my broad agreement with Isaacs’ suggestion that effective altruism could benefit from a more co-ordinated approach
Altruism (biology · Argument (complex analysis · Blame · Economics · Epistemology · Law and economics · Point (geometry · Political science · Position (finance · Positive economics · Poverty · Praise · Sociology · Climate Change and Geoengineering · Law · Medicine · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Psychology · Social Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.29 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2019 - 2025 (7) |
| Highly cited | No |