Question
Based on the article "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" by Peter Singer
One conclusion that Singer reaches is that:
A. We ought to prevent as much suffering as we can without sacrificing something else of comparable moral importance.
B. Whether or not we have a moral obligation is an empirical question.
C. Affluence can turn a moral duty into a charitable act.
D. If a conclusion does not follow from true principles it should not be accepted.
One conclusion that Singer reaches is that:
A. We ought to prevent as much suffering as we can without sacrificing something else of comparable moral importance.
B. Whether or not we have a moral obligation is an empirical question.
C. Affluence can turn a moral duty into a charitable act.
D. If a conclusion does not follow from true principles it should not be accepted.
Answers
There are no human answers yet.
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
The conclusion that Peter Singer reaches in "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" is:
**A. We ought to prevent as much suffering as we can without sacrificing something else of comparable moral importance.**
Singer argues for a moral obligation to provide assistance to those in need, emphasizing that affluent individuals have a responsibility to help prevent suffering in a way that does not demand significant sacrifices of comparable moral importance.
**A. We ought to prevent as much suffering as we can without sacrificing something else of comparable moral importance.**
Singer argues for a moral obligation to provide assistance to those in need, emphasizing that affluent individuals have a responsibility to help prevent suffering in a way that does not demand significant sacrifices of comparable moral importance.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.