Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Lifeboat ethics argument
Lifeboat ethics argument
Lifeboat ethics argument
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
“Population, Sustainability, and Malthus: Crash Course World History”, John Green examines one of the theories about the downfall of humanity, proposed by Thomas Malthus. Malthus wrote an essay on the Principles of Population to explain why at the time, population growth was steadily slow. John Green goes ahead to talk about how Malthus compared the poor to rabbits. Expressing that the same powers that constrained the population of rabbits would do likewise to poor people. Forces such as: predators, weather, epidemics and starvation.
In 1960, a man named Paul Ehrlich shared his fears of overpopulation in the world through his book called, “The Population Bomb”. He made many predictions about what kind of disasters we would face if drastic measures were not taken. Zero Population Growth became a political movement that wanted to limit births and give rewards to couples without children. However, humanity has managed to survive even with the current population growth. Paul Ehrlich believes that even though his predictions didn’t happen, it doesn’t mean he was wrong.
Hardin strongly appeals to logos to show his readers that rich countries like the United States shouldn’t help poor countries because it would continue the growth rate of poor countries and will leave future generations with a poor quality of life. One way he does this is by using statistics. While discussing at the beginning the metaphor of lifeboats and explaining the gap between the population of rich countries compared to poor countries Hardin says, “On average poor countries undergo a population a 2.5 increase in population each year; rich countries about 0.8 percent” (par. 28). This is effective because it is makes the reader realize that poor countries are taking over population wise; therefore, are in need of more resources than we are. That means that if we want to help poor countries we have to share with them, but
In today’s world, food is one of the most discussed topics. Robert Paarlberg, in his essay, Attention Whole Food Shoppers, spells this out as an ‘elite preoccupation’ (Paarlberg, 141), especially in the West. He argues that there is a current trend where modern eco-foodies are pushing for a sustainable world and are not taking into account the more crucial problem: global deprivation and hunger. Robert Paarlberg is a B.F Johnson professor of political science at Wesley College and an associate at Harvard University’s Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.
Agricultural Economist Nils Olsen predicted that the world would overpopulate and not have enough food to sustain the world. This warning encouraged farmers to yield as much as the could. Despite Nils Olsens’ false prognosis the effect it had on a farmers ideology was
In “Slow Violence And The Environmentalism of The Poor”, Rob Nixon contrasts our vision of the world. Indeed, his book paints and tend to explain facts that can be directly related to neoliberalism. He looks toward the poorest countries and people that suffer the most. Their freedom is mainly base on their financial capacities. In other word, the people that are not able to afford a sustainable environment have to live in an unhealthy environment.
Benjamin thinks that just because people are born in a poor country does not mean they are still not human beings and should be aided by the US. He said the “United States has always been a humanitarian people’. (350) Both of these writer’s are not in agreement when it comes to population control either. Walter says Garret did not consider some possible solutions to the overpopulation like family planning, and ZPG (Zero Population Growth) (347-348). Hardin writes that poor country’s have higher population growth than rich countries and that if we send them food they’re population will grow even higher but if we don’t there population will be “checked by crop failures and famines” (423).
The Poor “ Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor” written by Garrett Hardin claims all nations must fend and protect their resources without interference from other nations. If we do not protect ourselves there will be nothing left for the future generations, he says. Harding was a Professor of Ecology which involves learning of resource distribution and in western civilizations application of ecology. Born in Dallas, Texas in 1915 his family moved frequently because his father was the representative of Illinois Central Railroad. Hardin earned his Bachelors in Zoology and a PHD in Microbiology, before dying in 2003.
Ethics Paper Today there are multiple countries struggling with lack of food due to various reasons such as natural disasters, manmade disasters, government policies and individuals actions. In Peter Singer’s article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” we see him focusing on all these aspects and the negative impacts they portray on those in desperate need (Singer, 1972, 229). Singer does this with a utilitarian approach which means he looks at situations as either right or wrong solely on the outcome of choosing one thing over another(Schweickart, 2008, 473). This, therefore, takes into account the interests of others.
Helping the poor Garrett Hardin puts forward an argument against helping the poor that it will increase overpopulation. It is agreeable that his idea of helping the poor will increase overpopulation. Overpopulation is an acute problem that effect the poor even today. Many of the richer countries are like a lifeboat, trying to stay afloat, because only so many people can fit into the lifeboat. So while doing what they can to help others they have to not drown themselves.
Taylor, I liked how you incorporated the fact that most Americans are beyond lucky when it comes to the adequate supply of food we have and how others around the world are not as blessed. This showing that many Americans take for granted the resources that we have. By including this you explain that we are very lucky, and therefore it would be possible for us to help others in need. You stated, “It rarely comes into our minds about the possibility of spending our money to benefit others rather than to benefit ourselves,” which is something that is in fact very true about most people (Long 1). I also agree with your opinion that it America should work on helping people who face poverty in our country, before helping those in other countries.
The less fortunate are often overlooked because of their distance in the world. Contrary to this popular belief, philosopher Peter Singer believes that distance is both irrelevant and insignificant when helping others. Throughout this essay, I will argue in favor of Singer’s arguments. I believe Singer is accurate when he claims distance is irrelevant when human lives are at stake. Privileged people should always help the less fortunate as long as they are not sacrificing anything of comparable moral value.
Hardin states that when immigrants come over to there home country they have to provide there needs and resources to the immigrants, but the immigrants just keep coming because they are getting free resources and they don't have to do anything to get the resources. “In sharing with each according to his needs, we must recognize that needs are determined by population size, which is determined by the rate of reproduction, which at present is regarded as a sovereign right of every nation, poor or not(Hardin)”. Swift figures if the poor eats there children then it would help with overpopulation because they wouldn't be keeping the kids, but instead they would eat the kids or sale them off.” I have already observed, it would greatly lessen the number of papists, with whom we are yearly overrun, being the principal breeders of the
In the movie Crimson Tide, we look to the question ethical decisions, and what someone would do when thrown into a situation that made them question themselves, and who they serve for. In this example, when serving in the United States Military, once a solider is given orders, that solider must follow the orders out and not to question them. The trust between the solider and the higher command giving orders is almost based on blind faith. The solider relies on the higher commands decision of protecting democracy, even if someone, or a lot of people are killed. Is it an ethical decision to follow a commander’s order even if it means killing mass numbers of innocent civilians?
A key issue that intrigues me is the link between population growth and resource sustainability. The pessimistic ideas of Malthus were supported by evidence such as the Great Chinese famine of the late 1950s. Global population is projected to reach nine billion by 2045, this exceeds the rate at which food production grows. A key question