World
World Hunger
Hunger &
&
Moral
Moral Obligation
Obligation
Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D.
University of San Diego
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
Professor of Philosophy
1
Overview
1.
2.
3.
4.
Are People the Problem?
The Case for Helping Other
Countries
The Case Against Helping Other
Countries
Conclusion
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
2
1.
Are People the Problem?
n
The Bet
–In 1980, two secular prophets
made a $1,000 bet about the
future of the planet.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
3
Paul Ehrlich
Paul Ehrlich, author of The
Population Bomb (1968) and
How to be a Survivor, bet
that the world would get
worse and worse.
This is an example of the
apocalyptic attitude one
sometimes encounters in
discussions of world hunger
and the environment.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
4
Julian Simon
n
Julian Simon,
Professor of Business
Administration at the
University of Maryland
and a Senior Fellow at
the Cato Institute, bet
that the world would
get better and better.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
5
The Terms of the Bet
n
Ehrlich picked the indicators: the
change in the price of chromium,
copper, nickel, tin, and tungsten I
real, uninflated dollars over a 10 year
period.
– If prices went up, Simon would pay
Ehrlich
– If prices went down, Ehrlich would pay
Simon
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
6
The Outcome
Ehrlich lost.
– The price of all five metals went down, even in
real dollars
Ehrlich has not made a bet since then.
The interesting question that this raises is
whether fewer people is the answer to the
problem of world hunger. Simon
maintains that people are the real source
of wealth in the world, and that we need
more—not fewer—people if the world is to
get better and better.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
7
Population Trends, 1950-2050
Source:
http://www.chem.brown.edu/chem12/un%20population/unPopulation.html
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
8
Population Trends
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
9
Changing Fertility Rates
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
10
Total Fertility Rate 2004
Over 2.1 (replacement rate)
1 Somalia
6.84
2 Afghanistan
6.75
3 Niger
6.75
4 Uganda
6.74
5 Yemen
6.67
6 Congo,
6.62
25 Rwanda
5.49
36 Sudan
4.85
49 Iraq
4.28
52 Pakistan
4.14
113 Greenland
2.41
Source: CIA: The World Factbook
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
11
135
143
153
154
162
165
167
172
173
179
180
181
182
187
3/16/2016
Total Fertility Rate 2004
1.6
–
2.1
2.02
Chile
Brazil
Thailand
Ireland
New Zealand
Norway
Australia
Denmark
Finland
Cuba
Sweden
United Kingdom
Netherlands
Canada
1.93
1.88
1.87
1.79
1.78
1.76
1.74
1.73
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.61
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
12
194
195
196
202
203
204
208
209
215
216
218
220
223
224
226
3/16/2016
European Union
Portugal
Switzerland
Japan
Poland
Germany
Austria
Greece
Italy
Spain
Russia
Korea, South
Lithuania
Singapore
Hong Kong
1.48
1.47
1.43
1.39
1.39
1.39
1.36
1.33
1.28
1.28
1.27
1.26
1.19
1.05
0.91
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
Total
Fertility
Rate 2004
Below 1.6
13
Changing Mortality Rates
Although fertility rates are declining, mortality
rates are also important and they are creating a
counter-pressure in terms of population
decrease.
– Overall, people are living longer
– Far fewer people die in early childhood (5 years old or
younger)
The overall effect is that, although fewer people
are being born, they stay around on the earth for
a longer time!
Another important factor is the impact of HIVAIDS, especially in Africa.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
57
59
63
64
69
85
87
108
122
168
3/16/2016
Swaziland
Botswana
Lesotho
Zimbabwe
South Africa
Namibia
Zambia
Russia
India
Venezuela
Spain
United States
Mexico
Canada
Australia
Ireland
Svalbard
38.80
37.30
28.90
24.60
21.50
21.30
16.50
1.10
0.90
0.70
0.70
0.60
0.30
0.30
0.10
0.10
0.00
2003 est.
2003 est.
2003 est.
2001 est.
2003 est.
2003 est.
2003 est.
2001 est.
2001 est.
2001 est.
2001 est.
2003 est.
2003 est.
2003 est.
2003 est.
2001 est.
2001
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
HIV/AIDS
rates
15
The Anaconda Effect
Rapid population changes often look like
an anaconda snake that has just eaten a
large animal.
– Just as we can see the animal moving through
the snake, so we can see the change moving
through history.
– The baby boom, for example, moves through
history like a bulge, affecting the number of
people in a given age distribution.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
16
Age Distribution, 1
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
17
Age Distribution, 2
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
18
Aging Populations
http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2004/english/ch2/page5.htm
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census (2000).
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
19
United States Foreign Aid, 1
Net ODA in US Dollars
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
20
United States Foreign Aid, 2
Net ODA as percentage of GNP
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
21
The Income and Wealth Gap
Consider these global figures, provided by
The Economist magazine in a 2011 article
on “Global Leaders.” The richest one
percent of the world’s population controls
over 40% of the world’s wealth, while the
bottom half of the world’s population
control only 1% of its wealth. This is a
staggering discrepancy between the top
and the bottom.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
22
Jan Pen’s Parade
One way of visualizing the discrepancy in wealth and inequality
around the world was suggested by the Dutch economist Jan Pen in
his book Income Distribution. Imagine a parade in which the people
in the parade pass by in a steady stream, taking an hour from the first
marcher to the last. Further imagine, Pen suggests, that these people
went in order, based on their income, those who make the least at the
head of the parade with the biggest earners bring up the rear.
Furthermore, and this is the key element, imagine that a person’s
height was proportionate to his or her income, with an average height
being equivalent to an average income. At first, the marchers
wouldn’t even be visible: losing money, their height would
unfortunately put them below the surface. They would be followed by
midgets, the jobless and the working poor—for half an hour. A total
of forty-five minutes would have elapsed before the first person of
average height. With six minutes left, the marchers are twelve feet
tall, and growing fast. The last four hundred marchers are each over
two miles tall.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
23
The Case for Helping
Other Countries
The Argument from Virtue
The Issue of Complicity
The Group Egoist Argument
The Strict Utilitarian Argument
The Basic Rights Argument
The Kantian Imperfect Duty
Argument
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
24
The Argument from Virtue
The Moral Force of
Suffering
– In the face of deep
suffering, we
cannot help but to
respond with
compassion
The Issue of Luck
The Place of the
Children
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
25
The Issue of Complicity
We don’t deserve to be born into an
affluent society any more than we
deserve to be born into an
impoverished society
However, we do benefit from the
exploitation of poorer societies
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
26
The Group Egoist Argument
There may be good, self-centered
reasons for aiding other countries
The basic argument
– Moral Premise: We ought to do whatever
helps our group’s welfare.
– Empirical Premise: Helping some other
countries will benefit the United States
– Conclusion: We ought to help some
other countries.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
27
The Strict Utilitarian Argument
Peter Singer has
argued that as
utilitarians we ought to
seek to reduce the
overall amount of
suffering in the world,
even at great cost to
those of us who have
more affluent life
styles..
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
28
The Basic Rights Argument
Henry Shue, in Basic Rights, has
argued that
»everyone has a right
to minimal
subsistence
»this is a positive
right, i.e., one that
imposes obligations
on others to assist in
meeting this right
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
29
The Kantian Imperfect Duty
Argument
Kant distinguishes between:
– Perfect duties: require specific actions and
conditions that can be met all the time, such as
the duty to tell the truth
– Imperfect duties: require that we perform some
among a group of actions
The duty to benevolence is an imperfect
duty, requiring us to help some of the
poor and starving some of the time.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
30
Killing and Letting Die
Some philosophers,
such as Peter Singer,
have questioned the
moral significance of the
distinction between
killing and letting die.
– Is it morally wrong to let
someone die when we
can easily present their
death without great risk
or harm to ourselves?
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
31
The Case against Helping
Other Countries
The Lifeboat Argument
The Effectiveness Argument
The Libertarian Argument
The Particularity Argument
The Liberal State Argument
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
32
The Lifeboat Argument
Garrett Hardin, in
“Lifeboat Ethics,”
maintains that we
have a duty not to
help the poor and
starving of other
countries.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
33
The Lifeboat Metaphor
Hardin claims that
rich nations are like
lifeboats in a sea with
the poor of the world
swimming around
them.
If the rich nations let
the poor ones into the
lifeboat, the boat will
be swamped and
everyone will be lost.
http://www.es.ucsb.edu/faculty/hardin.htm
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
34
Evaluating the Metaphor
Presumes rich nations are like boats,
poor are like swimmers
Presumes ultimate fate of lifeboat is
independent of fate of those in the
water
Ignores the question of whether
some may have been pushed into the
water.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
35
The Effectiveness Argument
Claims that aid just doesn’t work:
– Bureaucracies tend to perpetuate
themselves and the problem they
administer
– Local economies can be destroyed by
aid
– Aid can create unhealthy dependence
– Local corruption can prevent aid from
reaching its intended recipients
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
36
The Libertarian Argument
Libertarians claim we have only negative
rights and only negative duties, I.e., duties
of non-interference.
Libertarians see the right to property as
being almost as important as the right to
life--thus there must be an extremely
strong justification for depriving people of
their property.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
37
The Particularity Argument
Special Obligation to Take Care of
Our Own
The Efficiency Argument
Epistemological Considerations
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
38
Special Obligation to Take Care
of Our Own
Advocates of particularity maintain
that we have a special obligation to
take care of our own, I.e., our family
and loved ones, our town, our nation.
This take precedence over any
obligations to help those who are
distant from us.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
39
The Efficiency Argument
Some advocates of particularity maintain
that, whatever our moral obligations may
be, it is simply more efficient for us to take
care of our own.
This gives us a “moral division of labor” in
which each group is entrusted with caring
for the welfare of that group as a whole.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
40
Epistemological Considerations
Advocates of particularity also
maintain that local people are best
equipped to know what will be best
for local people.
Correlatively, we are in the best
position to know what is best for
those close to us.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
41
The Liberal State Argument
Some advocates of liberalism maintain
that the liberal state can only function
well--that is, provide its citizens with what
they need--if it rests on a solid economic
foundation.
Consequently, the state is justified in
restricting immigration, etc. to protect the
minimal level of economic well-being of
the state.
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
42
Conclusion
Short term aid
Long term aid
A Common World
3/16/2016
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman
43