Immigration: Ethical Dilemmas,H07
Humanities HSB-23, Vanier College
Reading summary
Reading 8, Singer, “One Community”
1. (a) The title of the first section of this reading is “Human Equality: Theory and
Practice”. What is Peter Singer, the author, comparing, here, with regard to human
equality? That is, what is he saying about our attitudes toward human equality, in
theory, and about our action and attitudes in practice? What do the September 11, 2001
attacks and their aftermath allow Singer to conclude about American attitudes towards
human equality? (pp. 150-51)
(b) What does Singer want to highlight about partiality and about the idea of “preference
for our own”? (pp. 152-53) (two students separately)
2. (a) Singer says that for moral judgements to count, they must be universalizable (p.
155 top). What does this mean?
(b) What commonly-held view about preference/partiality for “our own kind” does
Singer want to undermine/unsettle/upset? (p. 154) What test does he want to apply to the
question of whether we have special duties to those “of our own kind”? (p. 155)
(b) What is the relationship between universalizability and impartiality (p. 154)? (two
students separately)
3. (a) Singer presents two versions of an argument in favour of impartiality/impartialism.
In other words, he presents two arguments that give a moral basis for impartialism.
Summarize these two arguments by identifying the principles that they each express. (pp.
155-158 top)
(b) What is the criticism of or objection to impartialism? (p. 158) What is the
impartialist response to that criticism/objection? That is, in what terms do the supporters
of impartialism respond to the objection? (p. 158 bottom-159). (2 students team or
individual)
4. Singer says that partial preferences need to be assessed/evaluated from an impartialist
standpoint. That is, if it does not seem reasonable to require absolute impartiality, then
we need to assess what degree of partiality we should show to other human beings who
are considered to be close to us or “of our own kind”. Summarize Singer’s assessment of
partial preferences/special duties with respect to each of the following:
children; friends and lovers; parents; those who have rendered assistance; neighbours;
kin. (pp. 160 bottom-167 top). (2-3 students, team of separately)
ImmEth, R8, H07
5. Are there impartial reasons for favouring one’s compatriots over foreigners; for
favouring those who share our nationality over those who do not? (pp. 167-175)
Answer by filling out the table below. (4 students in 2 teams)
Favouring our compatriots/fellow citizens: arguments and counter-arguments
Position or stance
Line of argument
Assertions/propositions in support of
showing preference for our fellow
nationals
Counter-arguments/propositions to
the stance in favour of preferences
Extended kin argument
Community of
reciprocity argument
Imagined community
argument
Efficiency of nations
argument
Justice and equality
within the nation first,
between second
6. (a) What is Singer’s assessment of the idea that the interests of one’s fellow citizens
should override the interests of other people who are not one’s fellow citizens? (p. 180)
(b) What does this assessment lead Singer to conclude about the commitment of the USA
to foreign aid? (p. 180)
(c) What are the facts of the foreign aid commitment of the USA? According to Singer,
how do these facts compare to the attitude of Americans with the attitudes of Americans
with respect to that commitment? (pp. 181-85) (2 students separately)
7. (a) Singer presents the case of Bob and his Bugatti to make an ethical point about our
obligation to give to those worse off than ourselves, especially when we are living well.
What does the case lead Singer to conclude about:
(i)
the morality of not sending money to international aid organizations if you
can afford it (p. 188)
(ii)
the level or extent of sacrifice we should make with respect to the poor
and disadvantaged. (p. 189)
(b) What are the two objections to the argument that we (citizens of the well-off world)
are bound ethically to donate more money to aid agencies? (pp. 190-192) (2 students
separately)
8. How much should we (anyone with income to spare) give to organizations that work
to help the world’s poorest people? Answer by summarizing the three propositions about
giving. In what terms are these propositions justified? (pp. 193-95). (1-2 students)
ImmEth, R8, H07