Singer's argument, though, loses its persuasion towards the end. Two quotes in particular cause the strength of Singer's argument to weaken. Singer's argument has taken the form of a pathetic appeal in that it has appealed to the reader's emotions.
The consequence of Dora's action was the child lived, therefore Dora acted right. We can help save the child or do nothing and let the child die. She is then confronted with the moral decision of either keeping the money and ignoring the horrible fate of the boy, or returning to rescue him.
She would then have become, in the eyes of the audience, a monster. Thus, this ground for limiting how much we ought to give also fails. In a later paragraph, Peter Singer provides statistics about the percentage of gross national product that goes to foreign aid, along with the amount that is recommended by the United Nations.
When Bob first grasped the dilemma that faced him as he stood by that railway switch, he must have thought how extraordinarily unlucky he was to be placed in a situation in which he must choose between the life of an innocent child and the sacrifice of most of his savings.
But he was not unlucky at all. Would that make it all right for Bob to do the same? The essay was written by Australian philosopher Peter Singer, who is well known for his contributions to the philosophy of ethics and morality. The writer did describe it very well what was occurring in both situations to give us an understanding of what he was trying to communicate to us.
He had a strong argument up to this point but the last page of the article almost completely cancelled out the strength that the rest of the argument had. We are all in that situation. A recent article about Singer in The New York Times revealed that the philosopher gives one-fifth of his income to famine-relief agencies.
Singer relates the stories of Dora and Bob to this argument about Americans not donating to the poor by saying that "Bob's situation resembles that of people able but unwilling to donate to overseas aid" Singer Singer's demand that people donate all of their surplus money made me, and I'm sure other people who have read this article as well, irritated at Singer for making such a large request without explaining why this was the right thing to do and almost made me not want to donate at all because Singer had angered me.
He ultimately relies on pathos to persuade readers to donate their excess income. But one doesn't need to embrace my utilitarian ethic to see that, at the very least, there is a troubling incongruity in being so quick to condemn Dora for taking the child to the organ peddlers while, at the same time, not regarding the American consumer's behavior as raising a serious moral issue.
Repetition was used to show the significance in the topic. The essay itself was pretty effective in my opinion it provided with enough facts and the author was able to put his own personal touch to it by putting emotion into his words.
He contends that ignorance is the only morally justifiable reason to do otherwise, and his essay is an attempt to educate his readers.
He showed that this amount of money could truly save a life and I believe it would be hard to find someone who would object to giving this relatively small amount of money if it meant saving a life. While some of the reasons provided by the the author to support his claims could be perceived as emotionally manipulative, the logical arguments that he makes are persuasive enough to carry the essay.
Drawing a connection between knowledge of the plight of hungry children and a moral obligation to provide financial aid to charitable organizations that feed and support those in poverty is an attempt to make an emotional appeal sound like a logical appeal.
She is then confronted with the moral decision of either keeping the money and ignoring the horrible fate of the boy, or returning to rescue him.
The language used suggests that Singer has adopted the expectation that the reader will donate, otherwise they will either pass self-judgment or risk moral judgment from others.
An accusatory tone resonates throughout the text.Peter Singer also used skills and devices that helped him get his message across to everyone. The use of rhetorical questions, repetition, Imagery are very present throughout the essay.
Rhetorical questions are used a lot when he wants to get his reader thinking about what they are doing right now and what has been done. The essay "The Singer Solution to World Poverty", written by Peter Singer, states that the only solution to solve world poverty is for Americans to donate all the money they have that is not needed for necessities to aid organizations overseas/5(2).
The Singer Solution To World Poverty By Peter Singer Rhetorical Analysis Essay. The Singer Solution to World palmolive2day.com have been a lot of changes in the past 2 decades globally.
On the verge of the globalization many, economic activities have shifted from West to East. In the essay “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” philosopher Peter Singer addresses the issue of poverty by suggesting Americans give away most of their income to aid those in need.
Singer believes that withholding income is the equivalence of. Essay on Analysis of The Singer Solution to World Poverty by Peter Singer - Saint Augustine once said, “Find out how much God has given you and from it take what you need; the remainder is needed by others.” (Augustine).
The Singer Solution To World Poverty By Peter Singer Rhetorical Analysis Essay. The Singer Solution to World palmolive2day.com have been a lot of changes in the past 2 decades globally. On the verge of the globalization many, economic activities have shifted from West to East.Download