cullity-demandasmorales delos ricos

8/12/2019 Cullity-Demandasmorales Delos Ricos

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cullity-demandasmorales-delos-ricos 1/22

Cullity, G. (2004). The Moral Demands of Auence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.[Paginado, se uede !itar"

#ntrodu!tion

$nyone %&o 'aes so'e eort to a!*uaint &i'+ or &erself %it& %&at t&e %orld is lie %ill soon

are!iate t&at, for 'any 'illions of eole %&o live outside t&e !o!oon of se!urity and !o'fortt&at %e enoy, it is &orri-le: a %asteland of suering, derivation, and inusti!e. &is raises t%o

o-vious and urgent *uestions: /&y $nd %&at needs to -e done in order to !&ange t&is #n 'y

vie%, t&e !ore of a !ogent ans%er is t&is. Poverty is dise'o%er'ent, and 1g&ting it 'eans

esta-lis&ing stru!tures of oliti!al a!!ounta-ility t&at !an aord rote!tion against t&e extre'es of

&u'an vulnera-ility.

o%ever, defending t&at vie% is not t&e fo!us of t&is -oo. # s&all say so'et&ing a-out it in %&at

follo%s3-ut not&ing original: t&e !&ater in %&i!& # dis!uss t&ese 1rst t%o *uestions %ill dra%

entirely on t&e oinions of ot&er %riters %&o are 'u!& -etter *uali1ed to ans%er t&e'. #nstead, t&e

fo!us of t&is -oo is on a t&ird, dierent *uestion: o% 'u!& oug&t you and # to -e doing a-out

ot&er eoles deserate need /e are art of t&e 'inority of t&e %orlds oulation a-le to!o''and enoug& resour!es to enoy a life of ease, !o'fort, and rivilege. o% 'u!& of t&ose

resour!es oug&t %e to -e using to &el t&e 'any eole %&o suer fro' extre'e 'aterial %ant

&e -oo is arranged in t%o arts. Part # argues t&at t&is is a real and insistent 'oral *uestion t&at

needs to -e ans%ered -y any a5uent erson. Part ## t&en defends an ans%er. (#n doing so, it also

sells out &o% a5uent you &ave to -e for t&e *uestion to aly.)

o say t&at 'y *uestion is dierent fro' t&ose 1rst t%o is not to say any 'ore t&an t&at. #t is not to

say t&at it !an su-stitute for t&ose *uestions, nor t&at it !an -e ans%ered indeendently. #n

arti!ular, # %ant to dis!lai' e'&ati!ally t&e idea t&at ex&orting eole to individual &ilant&roy

!ould in itself -e seen as an aroriate solution to t&e ro-le's of %orld overty6 or t&at, for

individuals, t&e *uestion of &o% -est to &el eole %&o need it !an -e ans%ered in a oliti!ally

neutral %ay. o%ever, # do t&in t&at, for anyone %&o is not a fatalist a-out &u'an 'isery, t&e

*uestion # a' asing does arise, and !alls for ans%er. #f t&ere are ee!tive t&ings t&at !an -e done,

&o% 'u!& oug&t # to -e doing to suort t&e'

&e -oo does not dis!uss all of t&e reasons t&at 'ig&t -e given for t&ining t&at # oug&t to use 'y

resour!es to &el t&e destitute. 7at&er, it !on!entrates on an argu'ent fro' -ene1!en!e: t&at is,

an argu'ent t&at

end .8

si'ly grounds t&e 'oral !ase for &eling t&e oor dire!tly in t&eir ressing need for assistan!e.

&is is not t&e only reason for t&ining t&at a5uent individuals 'orally oug&t to &el t&e oor, -ut

it is t&e si'lest and 'ost for!eful: # s&all exlain t&is in t&e 1rst t%o !&aters.

&e starting oint for 'y argu'ent is si'le and fa'iliar: it is a 9life+saving analogy -et%een

&eling eole at a distan!e, t&roug& aid agen!ies, and saving a ersons life dire!tly, %it& your

o%n &ands. &is analogy, fa'iliar fro' Peter ;ingers !o'arison of giving 'oney to aid agen!ies

%it& ulling a dro%ning !&ild fro' a ond, is -y no% %ell no%n to &iloso&ers3er&as even

&a!neyed. o%ever, # t&in its %idesread use says so'et&ing a-out its for!e: a for!e t&at it &as

indeendently of t&e utilitarianis' %it& %&i!& it is asso!iated in ;ingers t&oug&t. ;o, at least, #

s&all argue in C&aters 8 and 2.

&e si'li!ity of t&is analogy does &el to 'ae a for!eful 'oral oint. o%ever, t&ere are good

grounds for t&ining t&at it is not only si'le, -ut si'listi!. ;o'e !riti!s &ave !o'lained t&at it is'isleading, even de'eaning, to !o'are destitute $fri!ans to dro%ning !&ildren. &ey &ave a



oint. #n so'e &u'anitarian !rises, a !loser analogy %ould -e %it& do'esti! a-use. $nd in all

!ases, t&e situation is 'ore !o'li!ated t&an a !ase of si'le res!ue. $s ;adao Ogata (U< ig&

Co''issioner for 7efugees, 8==8>2000) &as said, 9t&ere are no &u'anitarian solutions to

&u'anitarian ro-le's.8 u'anitarian a!tion 'ay alliate, -ut it does not !ure. #t is i'ortant to

re!ogni?e t&is. o%ever, t&ere re'ains an i'ortant trut& in t&e si'le analogy. #t is t&at %e are

'orally re*uired to &el. &ere is &el t&at %e !an give, and t&ere is no ex!use for not giving it. &e'any disanalogies do not ae!t t&is fa!t.

Part # defends t&ese !lai's, and t&en ass &o% far t&is 'oral re*uire'ent extends. #n C&ater @ #

resent t&e !ase for t&ining t&at t&is leads to%ards an extre'ely de'anding vie%: t&e vie% t&at

ea!& of us is 'orally re*uired to renoun!e sending on ra!ti!ally all of t&e t&ings fro' %&i!& %e

!urrently get enoy'ent and ful1l'ent, in order to do as 'u!& as ossi-le to &el eole %&o &ave

not&ing. ;o'e &iloso&ers a!!et t&is. Aany ot&ers 1nd it a-surd, 'yself in!luded. #ndeed, t&e

a-surdity of t&e extre'ely de'anding vie% is so'eti'es used as a re'iss in argu'ents on t&is

toi!. By !ontrast, # t&in it is a !on!lusion t&at stands in need of usti1!ation, and # ai' to suly

t&at usti1!ation in Part ##.

#n dis!ussing t&is toi!, guilt+indu!ing 'eta&ors are easy to rodu!e. Aoreover, t&ere is a gooddeal of trut& in t&e'. /e do in&a-it a -u--le of rivilege, oating on a dee ool of &u'an 'isery.

But su!& 'eta&ors !an -e 'isleading. /e s&ould not suggest t&at t&ere is a radi!al searation in

t&e &u'an exerien!es and ful1l'ents of ri!& and oor. /e do not in&a-it searate %orlds. 9&e

oor are eole lie us, in &orri-le !ir!u'stan!es. &at, of !ourse, is art of %&at raises so a!utely

t&e *uestion # a' dis!ussing.

end .2

But it is also, # s&all argue, art of t&e ans%er to t&at *uestion. # !all t&e argu'ent resented in Part

## an argu'ent fro' t&e resuositions of -ene1!en!e. #ts strategy is to dra% attention to t&e

range of goods3a-ove and -eyond t&e -asi! good of -eing alive3t&at ground re*uire'ents on us

to &el ea!& ot&er. $nd it s&o%s &o% t&ese re*uire'ents only 'ae sense on t&e assu'tion t&at a

life of a !ertain ind3a life t&at is not restri!ted in t&e extre'ely de'anding %ay3is one t&at it is

not %rong for us to live.

&e !on!lusion # defend does still de'and 'ore of us t&an 'any of us 1nd !o'forta-le, -ut it is

'oderately rat&er t&an extre'ely de'anding. Ay ai' in t&is -oo is not to rea!&. (/&at !ould -e

'ore !ounter+rodu!tive, in %riting for an audien!e of &iloso&ers) But # t&in it is i'ortant not

to du! t&e !&allenge of selling out t&e ra!ti!al i'li!ations of 'y argu'ent, and # do t&at in

C&ater 80.

# &ave 'ade an eort to -e !areful, -ut # &oe not ex!ru!iatingly so: to tae an i'ortant toi! and

'ae it dull %ould -e unforgiva-le. &ere is a *ui! %ay to read t&e -oo, to see %&et&er t&e restof it is %ort& t&e trou-le. C&aters 8, 2, and @ !ontain t&e essen!e of t&e !&allenge resented -y

Part #6 C&aters D, =, and 80 give t&e 'ain stru!ture of 'y rely to t&at !&allenge. Even if you are

reading all of t&e !&aters, do not -ot&er %it& t&e endnotes, unless you are interested in 'y

referen!es to ot&er literature and asides.

end .F

8 &e ife+;aving $nalogy

s&o% !&ater a-stra!t and ey%ords

Garrett Cullity



/e in&a-it a %orld in %&i!& t&e lives of 'any 'illions of eole are i'aired and s&ortened -y

extre'e 'aterial overty.8 o% 'u!& oug&t a5uent eole3eole lie you and 'e3to -e doing

to &el t&e' &ere are dierent %ays of reading t&is *uestion. One of t&e' furnis&es t&e su-e!t

of t&is -oo.

One %ay to tae t&e *uestion is to see it as asing %&at %e !olle!tively oug&t to -e doing.2 Aany

eole are reared to agree t&at t&e ans%er to t&is is: 'u!& 'ore t&an %e a!tually are. (&e

eole of t&e %orlds ri!&er !ountries !urrently give a-out 0.2H er !ent of t&eir gross national

in!o'e in govern'ent and non+govern'ent 9aid of one ind or anot&er to t&e oorer ones.)F But

you !an agree %it& t&is %&ile -elieving t&at you are not ersonally oen to 'oral !riti!is'. $fter all,

t&ere is not&ing you !an ersonally do t&at %ould itself 'ae t&e dieren!e -et%een our

!olle!tively doing or failing to do %&at %e oug&t.

&e ot&er %ay of reading t&e *uestion, t&oug&, addresses it to ea!& of us individually rat&er t&an

all of us !olle!tively. $rgua-ly, every taxayer is already doing so'et&ing for t&e very oor, in

!ontri-uting t&roug& tax to govern'ent+funded aid rogra''es. But %&at oug&t you to -e doing in

addition to t&is et us s&aren t&e *uestion furt&er. $sing %&at you oug&t to do !an -e taen as

an invitation to say %&at %ould -e -est3%&at it %ould -e good to asire to as an ideal. Or it !an -etaen as a *uestion a-out %&at it %ould -e %rong not to do. /e !an t&in t&at a !ertain standard of

!ondu!t is -est3is ese!ially ad'ira-le3and still feel !o'forta-le a-out not 'eeting t&at standard

ourselves. o%ever, let us loo at t&e toug&er *uestion: /&at standard of !ondu!t to%ards t&e oor

s&ould %e feel 'orally un!o'forta-le %it& /&at is t&e a'ount %&i!& it %ould -e %rong not to give

to &el t&e'

#t is t&is *uestion, addressed to ea!& of us individually, t&at # s&all try to ans%er in t&is -oo. &at is

not -e!ause # t&in t&at t&e individual *uestion taes re!eden!e over t&e !olle!tive one. &ere is a

!lear sense in %&i!& t&e 1rst, !olle!tive *uestion is 'ore i'ortant. &e only %ay ulti'ately to end

t&e s!andal of %orld overty %ill -e -y large+s!ale !olle!tive a!tion3and t&is %ill not si'ly -e a

'atter of raising levels of 'aterial 9aid fro' ri!& to oor, eit&er, -ut re*uires transfor'ing t&eoliti!al, e!ono'i!, and so!ial

end .I

stru!tures t&at rodu!e t&ese atterns of derivation.4 # e'&asi?e t&is oint at t&e outset,

-e!ause # do not %ant to !reate t&e i'ression t&at # t&in individual &ilant&roy is t&e ans%er to

%orld overty.@ o%ever, t&e i'ortan!e of asing %&at s&ould -e done on a glo-al s!ale a-out

t&e for!es t&at !reate and sustain overty3a *uestion t&at alies to us all !olle!tively3s&ould not

lead us to ignore t&e furt&er *uestion t&at alies to ea!& of us individually. o% 'u!& s&ould # -e

doing to &el t&e oor # do not %ant to suggest t&at t&is is t&e 'oral *uestion a-out %orld overty.

But it is a *uestion ea!& of us needs to ans%er, and it is t&e *uestion # a' going to try to ans%er

&ere.

&e 1rst art of 'y ans%er is sulied in Part #. #t argues t&at a5uent individuals are a!ting 'orally

%rongly if t&ey do not rivately !ontri-ute t&eir ti'e and 'oney to voluntary &u'anitarian or ot&er

aid agen!ies, over and a-ove t&e !ontri-utions t&ey 'ay -e 'aing as taxayers to t&e aid

rogra''es suorted -y t&eir govern'ents.H #n itself, er&as, t&is is not a very !ontentious

!on!lusion. Of !ourse, t&ere are t&ose %&o disagree %it& it, and t&at alone 'aes it %ort& trying to

s&o% fully %&y %e oug&t to -elieve it. But t&ere are 'any eole %&o -elieve it already. #t is at

least as 'u!& to t&e', &o%ever, t&at t&is 1rst art of t&e -oo is addressed. Jor %&at anyone %&o

a!!ets t&is !lai' %ants to no% is, /&ere does it leave us #f giving u not&ing is %rong, &o%

'u!& 'ust # give u -efore # &ave done enoug& /e !an only ans%er t&is -y !arefully exa'ining

t&e argu'ent for t&ining it %rong to do not&ing: %e need to see &o% 'u!& furt&er t&at argu'entextends. $nd %&en %e do, %e s&all 1nd t&at it t&reatens to extend a very long %ay indeed. ;o far,



in fa!t, t&at Part # %ill leave us %it& t&e !&allenge of seeing &o% to avoid saying t&at %e 'ust give

u so 'u!& t&at %e eoardi?e ra!ti!ally all t&e sour!es of ersonal ful1l'ent in our lives.

#n Part ##, &o%ever, # s&all argue t&at t&is !&allenge !an -e 'et.

One arti!ular *uestion &as ust -een i!ed out !on!erning %&at t&e a5uent s&ould do for t&e

oor. <o% let us narro% our attention furt&er. &ere are dierent %ays of arguing for t&e !on!lusiont&at it is %rong for a5uent individuals not to !ontri-ute rivately to &eling t&e oor. # s&all -e

fo!using on one of t&e' in arti!ular.

$rgu'ents for t&is !on!lusion !an -e divided into t%o -road !lasses.I #n t&e 1rst, t&ere are %&at %e

!an !all !olle!tively -ased argu'ents: t&ese yield !on!lusions a-out %&at ea!& a5uent individual

oug&t to -e doing for t&e oor, -ut derive t&ose !on!lusions fro' !lai's a-out %&at %e oug&t to -e

doing !olle!tively. &e 'ost fa'iliar !olle!tively -ased argu'ents are argu'ents fro' usti!e. Jor

exa'le, t&ere is t&e follo%ing argu'ent fro' re!ti1!atory usti!e: %e are !olle!tively resonsi-le

for t&e inusti!e done in !reating and sustaining ot&er eoles overty, t&is uts us under a duty to

redress t&at inusti!e, and # 'ust dis!&arge 'y s&are of t&at duty.D Ea!& of us oug&t to &el t&e'

-e!ause %e toget&er are resonsi-le for t&eir needing

end .D

&el. $not&er ossi-ility is an argu'ent fro' distri-utive rat&er t&an re!ti1!atory usti!e. &is &olds

t&at it is si'ly t&e fa!t t&at t&e %orlds resour!es are ine*uita-ly distri-uted, rat&er t&an t&e

exlanation of &o% t&at distri-ution !a'e a-out, t&at gives us a duty to !&ange it, and 'aes it

%rong for 'e not to dis!&arge 'y s&are of t&is !olle!tive duty.= $ t&ird, distin!t ossi-ility is an

argu'ent fro' regulative usti!e, o-e!ting to t&e rules t&at !urrently govern international trade

and 1nan!ial a!!ounta-ility3to t&e rules t&e'selves, rat&er t&an t&e distri-utions resulting fro'

t&eir ali!ation. &ese rules, it 'ig&t %ell -e argued, unfairly enfor!e ot&ers overty for our

advantage6 %e are !olle!tively resonsi-le for refor'ing t&e'6 and # oug&t to lay 'y art in doing

so.80

#n t&is -oo # s&all -e !on!entrating on an argu'ent t&at is dierent fro' t&ese. #t is not an

argu'ent fro' usti!e. $nd t&e initial version of it t&at # s&all set out s&ortly is individually rat&er

t&an !olle!tively -ased: it does not derive its !on!lusions fro' !lai's a-out %&at %e oug&t to -e

doing !olle!tively. #t is not t&at argu'ents fro' usti!e of t&e inds ust 'entioned are i'lausi-le.

#t is ust t&at, given t&e !o'lexity of t&e issues t&at need to -e resolved in order to develo t&e'

!onvin!ingly, # !ould not &oe to dis!uss t&e' t&oroug&ly alongside t&e argu'ent # do dis!uss. $

!onvin!ing argu'ent fro' re!ti1!atory usti!e, for exa'le, %ould need to settle t&e !o'li!ated

e!ono'i! and ot&er &istori!al *uestions re*uired in order to identify t&e !auses of t&e !urrent star

disarities in glo-al standards of living. But t&at %ould only -e a 1rst ste. #t %ould need to defend

a rin!ile for t&e trans'ission of resonsi-ility over ti'e, in order to suort t&e !lai' t&at %eno% -ear resonsi-ility for inusti!es !o''itted -y ast 'e'-ers of grous to %&i!& %e -elong6

and it %ould need to defend a rin!ile of derivation t&at generates de'ands on individuals out of

su!& !olle!tive resonsi-ilities. # !ould not &oe to do all of t&at ade*uately in a -oo t&at

dis!ussed anyt&ing else.

&e argu'ent # fo!us on in t&is -oo is si'ler and 'ore dire!t, -ut at least as fa'iliar and

inuential. #t avoids t&ese !o'lexities, and # t&in t&is 'aes it 'ore for!eful. Jurt&er'ore, it

t&reatens to suort a 'u!& stronger and 'ore trou-ling !on!lusion. &e !on!lusion t&at it is 'ost

natural to dra% fro' a !olle!tively -ased argu'ent is t&at t&e a'ount # 'ust give u in order not to

-e doing %rong3as # s&all ut it, t&e a'ount t&at !an -e 'orally 9de'anded or 9re*uired of 'e3

is 'y o%n fair s&are of %&at %e oug&t !olle!tively to -e doing.88 #t is not o-vious straig&t o %&at

t&at 9fair s&are is: t&ere is lenty of s!oe for de-ating &o% s&ares of a !olle!tive resonsi-ility

s&ould -e divided a'ong t&e 'e'-ers of t&e grou t&at -ears it. o%ever, it is at least argua-le



t&at, if t&e !osts of eli'inating overty %ere aroriately divided a'ong t&e %orlds a5uent,

giving u 'y s&are %ould still leave 'e lenty to send on 'yself. Certainly, it is standardly

!lai'ed to -e one of t&e virtues of a 9fair s&are vie% of

end .=

t&e 'oral de'ands of a5uen!e t&at it avoids an extre'ely de'anding !on!lusion.82 &eargu'ent t&at # develo &ere, -y !ontrast, does t&reaten to suort a !on!lusion t&at is extre'ely

de'anding. Ay !on!ern in Part # %ill -e to develo t&is line of argu'ent into %&at # &old to -e its

strongest for'. #n Part ## t&e ai' %ill -e to resond to it.

8.8 E #JE+;$K#<G $<$OGL

&e argu'ent # a' going to develo %ill -e asse'-led !arefully over t&e !ourse of four !&aters.

But let 'e start %it& a si'le initial state'ent of t&e !entral idea. (/e s&all 1nd out in t&e follo%ing

!&aters t&at t&is initial state'ent is too si'le6 -ut %ell !o'e to t&e need for !o'li!ations and

*uali1!ations as %e go along.)

&e initial t&oug&t t&at is at t&e &eart of 'y argu'ent is one t&at 'any eole &ave &ad. &e life

of one of t&e %orlds oorest eole !ould -e transfor'ed -y an a'ount of 'oney t&at %ould 'ean

very little to 'e, and # !ould easily give t&at 'oney to an aid agen!y to &el it to &ave t&at ee!t.

Even if # &ave not&ing to do %it& !reating t&e overty t&at a5i!ts 'u!& of t&e %orlds oulation,

t&ere re'ains a serious 'oral *uestion %&at # a' reared to do in resonse to it. $nd it is &ard to

see &o% doing not&ing !ould -e rig&t. $fter all, if # %ere !onfronted dire!tly -y t&e great need of

so'eone %&o' # !ould &el at negligi-le !ost to 'yself, it %ould !ertainly -e %rong not to &el.8F

;o unless -eing !onfronted dire!tly 'aes a dieren!e3and %&y s&ould it3t&e sa'e s&ould -e

said a-out giving 'oney to aid agen!ies. Aoreover, sin!e volunteering 'y ti'e to %or for su!&

agen!ies %ould &el t&e' to a!&ieve 'ore, t&e argu'ent alies to !ontri-utions of ti'e as %ell as

'oney.

;tated in t&is %ay, t&e argu'ent is individually -ased: it does not derive its !on!lusion !on!erning

%&at # oug&t to do fro' !lai's a-out %&at %e all oug&t to -e doing. &e strategy is t&e si'le one

of 'aintaining t&at not !ontri-uting ti'e and 'oney to aid agen!ies is 'orally analogous to failing

to &el needy eole dire!tly. $tte'ts to for'ulate t&is argu'ent !arefully &ave often

!on!entrated on !o'aring !ontri-utions to aid agen!ies %it& t&e dire!t saving of life, as t&is uts

t&e !ase in its starest and !learest for'.84 # s&all do t&e sa'e &ere. &e analogy # s&all exa'ine

and defend is a life+saving analogy.8@

Pressing t&is analogy runs t&e ris of suggesting t&at t&reats to life ex&aust %&at is -ad a-out

extre'e overty. &at is far fro' true. #ndeed, it is argua-le t&at t&reats to life are not even t&e

%orst t&ing a-out destitution: %&at 'atters 'ore is t&e %ay it di'inis&es t&e *uality, rat&er t&an

'erely t&e duration, of eoles lives.8H o%ever, %e !an a!no%ledge t&is and still sensi-ly oint

out t&at at least one !onse*uen!e of extre'e overty

end .80

is t&reats to eoles lives. $nd t&at is all t&at is needed for a o%erful state'ent of t&e life+saving

analogy. #f # !ould easily save so'eones life rig&t in front of 'e, and t&ere are no 'itigating

!ir!u'stan!es, t&en it see's o-vious to 'ost of us t&at not doing so %ould -e %rong3%&et&er or

not # &ave done anyt&ing to !ause t&e t&reat in t&e 1rst la!e. &is %ould -e a funda'ental failure

to tae ot&er eoles interests seriously, and t&at 'aes it 'orally %rong. But if aid agen!ies save

lives t&at %ould ot&er%ise -e lost t&roug& t&e diseases, a!!idents, and starvation !aused -y

overty, t&en &o% is t&e failure to 'ae a s'all -ut life+saving donation to su!& agen!ies relevantlydierent &ere are dieren!es, of !ourse. Ay relations&i %it& t&e needy eole is dire!t or



i''ediate in t&e one !ase, indire!t or 'ediated in t&e ot&er. &is is true in t%o searate %ays:

t&eir need is resented to 'e i''ediately %&en it is rig&t in front of 'e, and any &el # give to

eole at a distan!e is given indire!tly, sin!e it is 'ediated -y t&e agen!y t&roug& %&i!& # give it.

But %&at needs to -e s&o%n is %&y t&ese dieren!es s&ould -e t&oug&t relevant to %&et&er not

&eling is %rong. $nd it is &ard to see %&at good grounds !ould -e given for t&ining t&at t&ey

s&ould.8I

# said a-ove t&at t&is is a fa'iliar and inuential argu'ent. Of !ourse, 'any eole 1nd it

i'lausi-le to suggest t&at not giving 'oney to aid agen!ies is as -ad as letting eole die rig&t in

front of you. # 1nd t&at i'lausi-le too, and # exlain %&y in t&e next !&ater.a But advo!ating t&e

life+saving analogy3t&e !lai' t&at t&ere is a 'orally relevant analogy -et%een saving lives dire!tly

and !ontri-uting to aid agen!ies3need not involve going t&at far. &e !lai' # s&all -e defending is

t&at t&e analogy s&o%s %&y not giving to aid agen!ies is %rong: it is %rong for t&e sa'e reason

t&at it is %rong not to save a life %&en you !ould easily &ave done so. But # s&all not -e arguing t&at

it is as %rong.

One radi!al %ay to resist t&is line of argu'ent %ould -e to deny t&at t&ere is a!tually anyt&ing

%rong %it& letting eole die rig&t in front of you.8D &is sort of vie% is not so'et&ing # a' goingto atte't to ans%er &ere. #t is not t&at # t&in t&ere is si'ly not&ing to -e said in rely to it. But

t&e dieren!es of 'oral outloo -et%een so'eone %&o &olds t&is vie% and t&ose of us %&o do not

are so great t&at %e need to no% a good deal 'ore a-out t&e rest of &is 'oral oinions -efore

no%ing %&ere to start. #n exlaining %&at is %rong %it& letting so'eone die %&en you !ould easily

&ave &eled, it 'aes sense to oint out t&at t&is involves a failure to tae ade*uate a!!ount of

ot&er eoles interests. But t&is is not 'u!& good as a rely to so'eone %&o is ust as liely to -e

denying t&at. &e dieren!e of 'oral oinion is o-viously a dee one: %e need to no% %&i!&

'oral !lai's are a!!eted -y su!& a radi!al oonent -efore no%ing %&at ind of argu'ent it

'aes sense to resond %it&. # s&all not try to survey t&e

end .88

ossi-ilities &ere. #nstead, # s&all assu'e a readers&i t&at agrees at least %it& t&is starting oint,

and oer %&at follo%s to t&e'.

&ere are dierent %ays of develoing an argu'ent in defen!e of t&e life+saving analogy. o%ever,

all of t&e' &ave a -road !o''on stru!ture. &ey -egin -y oering an a!!ount of %&y it is %rong to

let so'eone die dire!tly, %&en you !ould easily &ave &eled. &ey t&en ai' to s&o% t&at t&ose

reasons e*ually suort t&e vie% t&at it is %rong not to give to aid agen!ies. 7ead one %ay, t&e

*uestion %&y it is %rong to let a erson die dire!tly is t&e one # &ave ust de!lined to ans%er3t&e

*uestion &o% to refute t&e vie% of so'eone %&o disagrees. o%ever, t&ere is a less a'-itious %ay

to tae it. &ose of us %&o already agree %it& t&e udge'ent !an as %&at t&ere is to -e said in its

favour. Mierent %ays of ans%ering t&is *uestion oer us dierent %ays of defending t&e life+savinganalogy. et 'e say a little no% to indi!ate %&at is distin!tive a-out t&e argu'ent t&at follo%s.

8.2 ;UB;UAP#KE $<M <O<+;UB;UAP#KE KE7;#O<;

# do not !lai' to &ave invented %&at # a' !alling t&e 9life+saving analogy. Peter ;inger did t&at, in

8=I2, %&en &e !o'ared t&e failure to donate 'oney to%ards relief of t&e t&en+re!ent Bengal

fa'ine %it& t&e failure to sto to ull a dro%ning !&ild fro' a s&allo% ond.8= ;in!e t&en &is

exa'le, and t&e analogy &e dre% %it& e'ergen!y relief aid at a distan!e, &ave -een !ited,

dis!ussed, and reused in 'any dierent la!es.20

;ingers o%n resentations of t&e life+saving analogy dier slig&tly, -ut t&ey s&are a !o''on

stru!ture. &eir for' is su-su'tive: t&ey treat t&e tas of ustifying 'oral udge'ents a-outarti!ular a!tions as t&e tas of identifying general 'oral rin!iles under %&i!& t&ose udge'ents



!an -e su-su'ed as instan!es.28 $!!ording to ;inger, %e !an exlain %&at is %rong a-out failing

to ull t&e !&ild fro' t&e ond -y invoing t&e rin!ile t&at t&e failure to avert great &ar' to

so'eone else at a !o'aratively insigni1!ant !ost to yourself is %rong (ot&er t&ings e*ual).22 &e

argu'ent for t&e life+saving analogy t&en !ontinues -y ointing out t&at t&is rin!ile !overs t&e

failure to !ontri-ute to aid agen!ies as %ell6 t&erefore t&at 'ust -e %rong too.

&e version of t&e life+saving analogy t&at # s&all defend in t&is -oo is dierent fro' ;ingers. #n

art, t&is is -e!ause # s&are %it& ot&ers so'e general %orries a-out t&e su-su'tive i!ture of

'oral usti1!ation.2F One o-vious %orry !on!erns &o% t&e ustifying rin!iles aealed to in t&is

style of argu'ent are t&e'selves usti1ed. $not&er !on!erns t&e status of t&e 9ot&er t&ings e*ual

!lause, and %&et&er it !an ever -e fully eli'inated. o%ever, # do not roose to develo t&ese

lines of !riti!is': t&e e'&asis %ill -e on ursuing a ositive alternative argu'ent of 'y o%n.

&ere is a se!ond

end .82

reason for %anting to do t&is. #t is t&at t&ere is a deeer 'et&odologi!al !&allenge t&at needs to -e

addressed not only -y argu'ents for t&e life+saving analogy -ut -y 'any ot&er argu'ents forrevisionary 'oral !on!lusions too. # s&all des!ri-e t&is !&allenge s&ortly. Ay 'ain reason for

%anting to for'ulate a dierent argu'ent for t&e life+saving analogy %ill -e to s&o% &o% t&is

!&allenge !an -e 'et.

/&at are %e !o'laining a-out %&en %e say t&at your failure to rovide life+saving &el %as

%rong 7at&er t&an looing for a rin!ile under %&i!& to su-su'e t&is udge'ent, # roose

instead to !&ara!teri?e t&e attitudes to%ards ot&er eole t&at you are -eing !riti!i?ed for la!ing.

&e 'ost natural %ay to exlain %&at is %rong %it& egregious failures to &el ot&er eole is to

'ae t%o si'le oints. Ot&er eoles interests in re!eiving our &el give us a !lear reason to &el

t&e'6 and t&e failure to resond to t&is reason -y going a&ead and &eling t&e' !an -e 'orally

%rong. /&en it is %rong, t&is is -e!ause it is a failure to dislay an ade*uate ra!ti!al !on!ern for

ot&er eoles interests3a failure of -ene1!en!e.24 &is, # t&in, is t&e 'ost natural and

straig&tfor%ard %ay to develo t&e life+saving analogy. #f %&at is %rong a-out failing to 'ae a

s'all eort to save a life dire!tly is t&at it dislays a failure of -ene1!en!e, t&en t&ere is a strong

!ase for t&ining t&at t&e sa'e failure is dislayed -y non+!ontri-ution to aid agen!ies.2@

&is non+su-su'tive %ay of develoing t&e life+saving analogy is not !o'li!ated. #t !an lausi-ly

!lai' to !ature t&e straig&tfor%ard for!e of t&e analogy. #t is t&e lain fa!t of t&e a!ute need of t&e

%orlds oorest eole t&at 'aes it %rong to do not&ing a-out it3indeendently of any *uestions

a-out your resonsi-ility for !reating it3in t&e sa'e %ay t&at eoles a!ute need 'aes it %rong

not to &el t&e' %&en t&ey are rig&t in front of you. o%ever, it also fa!es a straig&tfor%ard

!&allenge, %&i!& %ill &ave to -e 'et if t&is argu'ent is to -e taen seriously.

8.F E AEOMOOG#C$ C$E<GE

o see t&is ro-le', let us return for a 'o'ent to ;ingers su-su'tive version of t&e argu'ent for

t&e life+saving analogy.

&at argu'ent &as a t&ree+stage stru!ture. $t stage 8 it -egins %it& so'e !on1dently endorsed

'oral udge'ents3udge'ents a-out t&e refusal to 'ae a s'all sa!ri1!e to save so'eones life

dire!tly. Jro' t&ese, at stage 2, a general rin!ile is a-stra!ted: t&e rin!ile t&at failing to avert

great &ar' to so'eone else at a !o'aratively insigni1!ant !ost to oneself is %rong (ot&er t&ings

e*ual). &is rin!ile is t&en invoed to suort, at stage F, anot&er 'oral udge'ent: t&at

!ontri-uting not&ing to aid agen!ies is %rong. #n t&is %ay, it is argued t&at t&e stage F udge'ent is

usti1ed, and t&at if our et&i!al outloo does not in!lude t&is udge'ent, it oug&t to -e revised.



end .8F

$n argu'ent %it& t&is stru!ture invites t&e follo%ing dile''a. #t loos as t&oug& %&at %e -egin

%it& at stage 8 %ill al%ays underdeter'ine t&e !ontent of t&e stage 2 rin!ile, unless it si'ly

-egs t&e *uestion outrig&t. /e !an &ardly in!lude a'ong t&e stage 8 udge'ents t&e one %e are

ai'ing to ustify: t&at %ould -eg t&e *uestion. But if %e do not, %e fa!e t&e ro-le' t&at t&ere %ill

-e 'any ossi-le %ays to generali?e at stage 2 fro' t&e udge'ents %e do -egin %it&. #n

arti!ular, t&ere %ill al%ays3as long as %e &ave not si'ly -egged t&e *uestion3-e a %ay of

generali?ing fro' t&e' t&at yields very dierent !on!lusions at stage F. #n t&e !ase t&at !on!erns

us, a rival rin!ile to !onsider is t&is: failing to &el anot&er erson dire!tly,in an i''ediately

resented e'ergen!y, at a !o'aratively insigni1!ant !ost to oneself is %rong (ot&er t&ings e*ual).

&is 'ore restri!ted rin!ile is !onsistent %it& t&e sa'e set of stage 8 udge'ents a-out saving

lives dire!tly. But it is also !onsistent %it& t&e udge'ent t&at, %&ere 'y relation to a &ar' # !ould

avert is not dire!t and i''ediate, doing not&ing a-out it is not %rong.

#ndeed, %&at 'aes t&is 'et&odologi!al !&allenge ese!ially a%%ard is t&at, to al'ost everyone,

it is a-out as o-vious t&at t&ere is a 'oral dieren!e -et%een your relation to so'eone %&ose life

is t&reatened rig&t in front of you and so'eone starving in anot&er !ountry as it is t&at failing to&el in t&e for'er !ase is %rong.2H &e need in t&e for'er !ase is resented to you dire!tly and

urgently, as de'anding an i''ediate resonse, and t&is fa!t is !learly taen -y 'ost of us to -e

'orally i'ortant. #f %e are -eginning, at stage 8, %it& !on1dently endorsed 'oral udge'ents,

t&en one of t&ese 'ay -e t&e udge'ent t&at it is %rong not to &el so'eone %&ose life you !ould

save dire!tly at s'all !ost6 -ut anot&er is t&at t&is is 'orally dierent fro' not !ontri-uting to

&eling eole at a distan!e.2I

#t 'ig&t see' te'ting to lo!ate t&e ro-le' &ere in t&e su-su'tive i!ture of 'oral usti1!ation.

o%ever, t&e 'et&odologi!al !&allenge is general enoug& to 'ean t&at any argu'ent for t&e life+

saving analogy %ill !onfront it. $fter all, any argu'ent for t&e life+saving analogy ro!eeds -y

taing an initial grou of udge'ents (a-out t&e dire!t saving of life), and deriving fro' t&e' a testfor good et&i!al udge'ents6 it t&en alies t&at test to a se!ond grou of udge'ents (a-out

giving to aid agen!ies). Pres!ind fro' t&e *uestion of %&et&er t&e test s&ould roerly -e

!on!eived as a rin!ile under %&i!& !orre!t 'oral udge'ents are to -e su-su'ed. &e for' of

t&e ro-le' re'ains: if t&e test itself is suosed to gain its aut&ority fro' a grou of !on1dently

endorsed initial udge'ents, %&at revents so'eone fro' invoing furt&er udge'ents as a ground

for revising t&e test

Ay ai' in t&e next !&ater is to for'ulate an argu'ent for t&e life+saving analogy t&at 'eets t&is

!&allenge. # t&in t&e 'et&odologi!al !&allenge !an -e 'et -y an argu'ent %it& t&e t&ree+stage

stru!ture, as long as it %ors

end .84

fro' t&e udge'ents endorsed at stage 8 -y lausi-ly identifying t&e reasons for 'aing t&e'. $s #

&ave indi!ated, t&e version of t&e argu'ent # s&all -e develoing exlains t&e %rongness of not

&eling ot&er eole as a failure %it& rese!t to a for' of 'orally i'ortant !on!ern3na'ely,

-ene1!en!e.

&e !on!ern to identify %&at is 9'orally re*uired and (later) 9'orally er'itted %ill see' to so'e

readers to !arry %it& it a suse!t i!ture of t&e nature of et&i!al en*uiry. On t&at i!ture, 'orality is

vie%ed as a syste' of ro&i-itions and er'issions, and t&e -usiness of nor'ative 'oral en*uiry is

to esta-lis& t&e extent of t&e ro&i-itions: t&en, as long as %e avoid %&at is for-idden, our a!tion is

'orally i'e!!a-le. But t&is, it !an -e !o'lained, is a narro%+'indedly legalisti! aroa!& to

et&i!al t&oug&t. &e ind of et&i!al ree!tion t&at oug&t to 'atter to us is ree!tion on &o% to live

%ell, not %&at to avoid.2D



$!tually, # agree t&at it is a serious distortion of et&i!al t&oug&t to redu!e it to a !on!ern %it&

avoiding %&at is %rong. But # a' not doing t&at. $ll # need you to agree %it& is t&at one i'ortant

art of our et&i!al t&oug&t !on!erns %&i!& %ays of a!ting and living t&ere is de!isive reason to

ree!t. #t is not ust t&at t&ere is a lot to -e said for saving a ersons life %&en you !ould easily do

so: not doing so !an -e %rong. &is oug&t to engage us -e!ause it !on!erns one of t&e 'ost -asi!

for's of !onsideration for ot&er eole.2= $ny et&i!al outloo %ort&y of rese!t %ill -e onea!!ording to %&i!& ot&ers interests are taen seriously3seriously enoug& to !ount t&reats to

ot&ers lives for 'ore t&an in!onvenien!es to oneself. $nd if so, %&y not %&en t&ey are distant &is

is enoug& to generate t&e !&allenge t&at t&is -oo &as set out to address. # s&all !ontinue to

dis!uss t&is !&allenge -y taling a-out 'oral re*uire'ent and er'ission. o%ever, for so'eone

to %&o' t&is is un!ongenial, everyt&ing # say !ould -e re&rased instead as a dis!ussion of t&e

%ays of living t&at !ould deserve our rese!t or e'ulation, all t&ings !onsidered.

end .8@

2 $n $rgu'ent fro' Bene1!en!e

s&o% !&ater a-stra!t and ey%ords

Garrett Cullity

$!!ording to t&e life+saving analogy, it is %rong not to donate your ti'e and 'oney to

&u'anitarian aid agen!ies, -e!ause refusing to do t&is is, in a 'orally relevant %ay, lie failing to

save so'eones life rig&t in front of you. &ere are dierent %ays of arguing for t&is vie%, and in

t&is !&ater # a' going to develo 'y o%n in so'e detail.

&e !entral idea # s&all ursue is t&at t&ese t%o sorts of ina!tion are 'orally analogous -e!ause

-ot& a'ount to a failure of ra!ti!al !on!ern for ot&ers interests. #n line %it& !urrent &iloso&i!alusage, # s&all refer to t&is ra!ti!al !on!ern as 9-ene1!en!e.8 $d'ittedly, t&is dearts fro' t&e

-roader usage t&at t&e ety'ology of t&is %ord suggests: as # s&all -e using it, it %ill not refer to

doing good generally, -ut only to t&e 'orally aroriate furt&ering of ot&er eoles interests.2 #n

t&is !&ater # start -y des!ri-ing -ene1!en!e and its ali!ation to t&e life+saving analogy. &en #

!onsider t&e 'ain for's t&at a 'et&odologi!al !&allenge to t&is version of t&e life+saving analogy

!an tae, and s&o% %&y t&ey fail.

2.8 BE<EJ#CE<CE

Bene1!en!e, as # understand it, is a ra!ti!al !on!ern for ot&er eoles interests.F #n !alling it a

ra!ti!al !on!ern, # 'ean t&at it is a !on!ern exressed in a!tion. Bene1!en!e is 'ore t&an si'ly

%is&ing so'eone %ell: it involves a!ting aroriately to &el ot&er eole %&en t&ey %ill -ene1tfro' it or, 'ore strongly, %&en t&ey need it.4 $nd in !alling it a ra!ti!al !on!ern, # 'ean t&at t&ere

is a distin!tive !lass of !onsiderations t&at a -ene1!ent erson !&ara!teristi!ally regards as good

reasons for a!tion.@ # s&all !all t&ese !onsiderations 9a -ene1!ent ersons reasons for a!tion.H &e

!ore of -ene1!en!e is t&is: it involves &eling ot&er eole, and doing so -e!ause you regard t&e

fa!t t&at it %ill -e good for t&e' as a good reason for &eling t&e'.

&is si'le des!rition of t&e !ore of -ene1!en!e 'ust -e *uali1ed in t%o i'ortant %ays,

&o%ever. Jirst, %e need to -e !areful not to 'isreresent t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons

reasons3t&at is, t&e o-e!t of &er !on!ern. $ !on!ern for ot&er eoles interests, under t&at

des!rition,

end .8H



%ould -e strangely a-stra!t and i'ersonal. o%ever, it does see' rig&t to say t&at t&is

des!rition i!s out t&e extension of t&e !lass of arti!ular t&ings t&at -ene1!ent eole are

!&ara!teristi!ally !on!erned a-out. Bene1!en!e involves treating as reasons for an a!tion fa!ts t&at

-elong to t&e !lass %ays in %&i!& t&e a!tion is in so'eone elses interests. &us, %&en %e des!ri-e

-ene1!en!e as a !on!ern for ot&er eoles interests, %e 'ust 'ae it !lear t&at t&is des!rition is

to -e read as identifying a feature t&at t&e o-e!ts of t&at !on!ern !&ara!teristi!ally ossess in!o''on, rat&er t&an as se!ifying t&e o-e!t of t&at !on!ern itself. # s&all !all t&is 9reading t&e

des!rition extensionally.

&e se!ond *uali1!ation is t&at, if 9-ene1!en!e is really t&e na'e of a *uality t&at %e s&ould -e

!riti!i?ed for la!ing, t&en it 'ust na'e a ra!ti!al !on!ern t&at is dis!ri'inating.I $!!ording to

'ost of us, a!ting fro' a !on!ern to furt&er so'eone elses interests 'ig&t -e i'rovident (for

exa'le, if # gave all 'y savings to t&e Nueen), irresonsi-le (if # attended to t&e needs of

strangers rat&er t&an t&e e*ual needs of 'y !&ildren), unust (if # stole to &el 'y friends), or

!rassly insensitive (if # &eled you !arry out a 'ali!ious lan).D &e *uality of -ene1!en!e %e

s&ould asire to &ave involves 'ore t&an si'ly a ra!ti!al !on!ern to furt&er ot&er eoles

interests: it in!ludes a sensitivity to %&en and &o% it is rig&t to furt&er ot&er eoles interests. $

dis!erningly -ene1!ent erson %ill re!ogni?e t&e %ays in %&i!& various ot&er !onsiderations !an

!ountervail against t&e for!e of ot&ers interests as reasons on %&i!& it is aroriate to a!t. &e

interests in *uestion 'ay not -e ones # oug&t to furt&er (as %&en t&ey are 'ali!ious), t&e availa-le

'eans of ro'oting t&e' 'ig&t -e %rong (as in stealing to &el 'y friends), or t&ere 'ig&t -e

so'et&ing 'ore i'ortant t&at # oug&t to -e doing instead (lie looing after 'y o%n !&ildren). $

dis!erningly -ene1!ent erson is so'eone %&o !&ara!teristi!ally a!ts to furt&er ot&ers interests,

for t&at reason, %&en t&at reason is not !ountervailed against -y !onsiderations of t&ese various

inds.

<oti!e t&at t&ere is a distin!tion to -e 'ade -et%een t%o dierent %ays in %&i!& %e !an treat

!onsiderations as !ountervailing. &e 'ost o-vious %ay is given -y t&e follo%ing sort of !ase.

;uose so'eone needs 'y &el, -ut t&e only %ay # !ould &el &i' is -y stealing or negle!ting 'y!&ildren: 'any of us t&in t&at, in at least so'e su!& !ases, it %ould -e %rong to &el. &is is not

-e!ause of t&e a-sen!e of a good reason for &eling, t&oug&: &is needs do still rovide 'e %it& a

good ro tanto reason to &el &i'. 7at&er, t&ere is a stronger reason to do so'et&ing else. #n t&is

sort of !ase, t&e reason to &el &i' is out%eig&ed. o%ever, so'e !ountervailing !onsiderations

see' to %or in a dierent %ay. ;uose you need 'y &el to !arry out a 'ali!ious lan. $gain,

'any of us t&in t&at &eling under t&ese !ir!u'stan!es %ould -e %rong. Aali!ious interests are

not interests of t&e ind a -ene1!ent erson oug&t to -e !on!erned to furt&er: t&e 'ali!iousness of

end .8I

your interests !learly !ountervails against t&e for!e of t&ose interests as a -ene1!ent ersons

reason for &eling you. o%ever, it does not see' rig&t to say t&at it !ountervails in t&e sa'e %ay

as -efore, -y out%eig&ing. Jor it is not as if # &ave one good reason for &eling you3t&at it is in

your interests3and anot&er for doing so'et&ing else instead. 7at&er, t&e 'ali!iousness of your

interests s&o%s %&y t&ese interests fail to rovide 'e %it& a good reason for &eling you at all.

&us, 'ali!iousness !ountervails -y under'ining t&e status of your interests as a reason for

&eling.=

o illustrate t&e oints # a' 'aing, # &ave reorted so'e !o''on oinions a-out arti!ular !ases.

Aay-e our oinions a-out t&ese !ases are %rong: 'y argu'ent does not rely on t&e'. &e only

i'ortant oints are t&e general ones t&ey illustrate. /e need to -e a%are of t&e ossi-ility t&at

!onsiderations !an !ountervail against t&e for!e of ot&ers interests as reasons on %&i!& it is

aroriate to a!t6 and t&at t&ey !an !ountervail in dierent %ays3-y eit&er out%eig&ing orunder'ining.



2.2 J$#U7E; OJ BE<EJ#CE<CE, $<M E #JE+;$K#<G $<$OGL

Bene1!en!e is a dis!ri'inating ra!ti!al !on!ern for ot&er eoles interests. &e relevant for' of

!on!ern involves treating ot&er eoles interests as a good reason for &eling t&e', and t&e

relevant for' of dis!ri'ination is a sensitivity to t&e !onsiderations t&at !an !ountervail against

t&is reason. But %&at a-out failures of -ene1!en!e3t&ose a!tions t&at are %rong -e!ause t&ey are

not -ene1!ent /&at general des!rition of t&ese !an %e give, and %&i!& a!tions are in!luded

#f, -y a failure of -ene1!en!e, %e 'ean an a!tion t&at is %rong, t&en t&is !annot si'ly -e

!on!etually identi1ed %it& not doing so'et&ing t&at %ould &ave -een -ene1!ent. o see t&is,

!onsider instan!es of indness and unindness3t&at is, -ene1!en!e and t&e failure of -ene1!en!e

on a s'all and everyday s!ale. /&en %e a!!use so'eone of a!ting unindly, t&e 'eaning of our

utteran!e is not reserved -y saying si'ly t&at t&ere is so'et&ing s&e did not do t&at %ould &ave

-een ind. Jor, at least in oular -elief, %&ile 'aing great eorts on -e&alf of ot&ers is !ertainly

ind, not 'aing su!& eorts is not unind. $!!ording to oular oinion, &ad # sent t&is afternoon

eeing old eole !o'any at a &o'e for t&e aged, it %ould &ave -een ind6 -ut 'y not &aving

done so %as not unind. Per&as oular oinion is 'istaen. o%ever, if t&ere is an error &ere, it is

not an error a-out 'eaning: 9a!ting unindly does not si'ly 'ean 9not doing so'et&ing %&i!&%ould &ave -een ind.

Unindness is not 'erely !ondu!t t&at is not ind, -ut !ondu!t t&at is insu!iently ind: on t&is, all

!o'etent users of t&e %ord !an agree. &e

end .8D

sa'e oint, for t&e sa'e reasons, &olds true of -ene1!en!e 'ore generally, !overing large+ as %ell

as s'all+s!ale &el. ere %e do not see' to &ave a %ord to !over all t&ose failures of -ene1!en!e

t&at are %rong, in t&e %ay t&at 9unindness !overs all t&ose failures of indness t&at are %rong.80 #

roose to get round t&is -y stiulatively reserving tal of 9failures of -ene1!en!e for !ondu!t t&at

is %rong. Jailures of -ene1!en!e, t&en, a'ount to !ondu!t t&at is insu!iently -ene1!ent, rat&ert&an si'ly not doing so'et&ing t&at %ould &ave -een -ene1!ent. /&en not erfor'ing a !ertain

a!tion %ould -e a failure of -ene1!en!e, # s&all say t&at t&at a!tion is 9re*uired -y -ene1!en!e.

o% 'u!& -ene1!en!e is su!ient, and &o% little is insu!ient $t t&e 'o'ent, it is an oen

*uestion &o% far %e s&all -e a-le to go to%ards giving a general ans%er to t&is *uestion. (# s&all

start ta!ling it in earnest in C&ater I.) o%ever, t&e des!rition of -ene1!en!e ust given does at

least tell us %&at %ould 'ae a ersons !ondu!t less -ene1!ent, and &en!e %&at %e s&ould -e

t&ining a-out in deter'ining %&et&er it is insu!iently -ene1!ent. ;ituations in %&i!& *uestions of

-ene1!en!e arise are situations in %&i!& so'eone !an -e &eled. o% -ene1!ent 'y resonse to

su!& a situation is deends on t%o t&ings: t&e strengt& of t&e reason for &eling, and t&e

signi1!an!e of any !onsiderations t&at !ountervail against t&at reason. &e stronger t&e reason for&eling, and t&e less signi1!ant t&e !ountervailing !onsiderations, t&e less -ene1!ent it is not to

&el. $nd %&en so'eones interests %ill -e very seriously !o'ro'ised if # do not &el &i', -ut

t&ere is no seriously !ountervailing !onsideration, t&en not &eling is a failure of -ene1!en!e3it is

insu!iently -ene1!ent, and t&erefore 'orally %rong.

o% serious is 9serious /e are not yet in any osition to give a general a!!ount of t&is. But %e do

not need t&at. #t is enoug& t&at %e !an identify one ind of !ase t&at !learly does 1t t&is

des!rition. #f # !ould save so'eones life dire!tly, t&e !ost to 'e %ould si'ly -e s&ort+ter'

exertion or in!onvenien!e, and t&ere is no ot&er !ountervailing !onsideration, t&en not &eling &i'

is %rong. /&en t&e reason for &eling is t&at it %ould save so'eones life, t&en t&at is serious

enoug&, and %&en t&e !ountervailing !onsideration is only t&at it %ould involve a s&ort+ter'

exertion or in!onvenien!e, t&at is slig&t enoug&, to 'ean t&at t&is !ounts as a failure of

-ene1!en!e. /e do not yet &ave a general %ay of dra%ing t&e line -et%een failures of -ene1!en!e



and ot&er a!tions of not &eling6 -ut %e do at least no% t&at t&is !ase falls on t&e failure side of

t&e line.

But if so, %e &ave all %e need in order to for'ulate a for!eful version of t&e life+saving analogy.

;uose # !ould easily save so'eones life %&en it is t&reatened rig&t in front of 'e, and t&ere is no

furt&er !ountervailing !onsideration, -eyond t&e s'all eort it %ould !ost 'e to &el. <ot &eling

in t&ese !ir!u'stan!es is, o-viously, a failure of -ene1!en!e3it is 'orally

end .8=

%rong. But if so, &o% !an %e roerly avoid saying t&e sa'e a-out t&e failure to 'ae life+saving

donations to aid agen!ies #f 'y doing so %ould save ot&er eoles lives, t&en t&at is t&e sort of

!onsideration t&at -ene1!en!e re*uires us to treat as a su!ient reason to &el, in t&e a-sen!e of

!ountervailing !onsiderations. #f t&ere are no !ountervailing !onsiderations, t&e failure to a!t on t&is

is a failure of -ene1!en!e, and t&at 'aes it 'orally %rong. But %&at ne% !onsiderations are

resent in t&e !ase of donating to aid agen!ies %&i!& !ould aroriately !ountervail against a

-ene1!ent ersons reason to a!t #f t&ere are none, t&en %e &ave exa!tly t&e sa'e !ase for !alling

t&is failure 'orally %rong as %e &ad for saying t&at a-out letting so'eone die in front of 'e.88

2.F E AEOMOOG#C$ C$E<GE 7EK#;#EM

#n C&ater 8, # des!ri-ed t&e -road t&ree+art stru!ture t&at is !o''on to argu'ents for t&e life+

saving analogy. &e argu'ent ust resented is no ex!etion. $t stage 8 %e -egin %it& t&e t&oug&t

t&at refusing to save a life at s'all !ost is %rong, all else e*ual. /e t&en as %&y. &e ans%er is

roosed: t&is involves failing to treat as a de!isive reason to a!t t&e fa!t t&at you !ould greatly

-ene1t so'eone else, %&en t&ere are no relevantly !ountervailing !onsiderations6 so its %rongness

!onsists in a failure of -ene1!en!e. &is gives us, at stage 2, a general test for failures of

-ene1!en!e. /e t&en aly t&is, at stage F, to t&e !ase of non+!ontri-ution to aid agen!ies, to dra%

t&e !on!lusion t&at t&is is %rong in t&e sa'e %ay.

o%ever, if it &as t&is stru!ture, t&e argu'ent is going to !onfront C&ater 8s 'et&odologi!al

!&allenge. #f our test for failures of -ene1!en!e is -eing dra%n fro' initial udge'ents a-out %&at

see's to -e o-vious, %&y not adot a dierent test3one favouring t&e vie% t&at it is only %&en a

ersons needs are resented to 'e i''ediately and !ould -e addressed -y 'e dire!tly t&at not

&eling &i' involves any failure of -ene1!en!e &ere are t%o 'ain %ays to ress t&is !&allenge,

and t&ey !orresond to t&e t%o oints e'&asi?ed in 'y des!rition of -ene1!en!e. Bot& t&e !lai'

a-out t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons reason and t&e treat'ent of t&e !onsiderations t&at !an

roerly -e treated as !ountervailing against it !an see' tendentious. # !lai' t&at t&e !ontent of a

-ene1!ent ersons reason for &eling is t&e si'le fa!t t&at it %ould -ene1t t&e erson %&o is

&eled. But %&y not say instead t&at a -ene1!ent ersons reason for &eling is t&e fa!t t&at it

%ould -ene1t so'eone %&ose need is resented to 'e i''ediately, or t&e fa!t t&at it %ould-ene1t so'eone dire!tly ;uose t&is 1rst !&allenge !an -e 'et: t&ere is a se!ond. Jor suose it

!an -e s&o%n t&at t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons reason for &eling 'ust si'ly -e t&at it

%ould -ene1t t&e erson &eled. /&y not t&en treat t&e non+i''edia!y of 'y relation to

end .20

so'eones need, or t&e indire!tness of t&e &el # !ould give, as a !ountervailing !onsideration &e

!lai', to -e sure, %ill not -e t&at t&is s&o%s t&at it is a!tually %rong to rovide &el of a non+

i''ediate ind. But it %ill -e t&at %&en so'eone elses need is not i''ediately resented to 'e,

t&at s&o%s %&y 'y not &eling involves no failure of -ene1!en!e.82

<on+i''edia!y and indire!tness see' to -e t&e !onsiderations t&at so'eone ressing t&is!&allenge s&ould !on!entrate on. # tae it t&at t&e !&allenge to -e addressed is t&at %&at 'aes



t&e dieren!e -et%een letting so'eone die rig&t in front of you and not saving so'eones life

overseas is si'ly t&e %ay in %&i!& t&e 1rst situation engages any nor'al erson in an ines!aa-le

%ay in %&i!& t&e se!ond does not. Aoreover, it s&ould not -e t&oug&t t&at t&is !&allenge !an -e

re-utted -y isolating t&e various !o'onents t&at 'ay !ontri-ute to i''edia!y or dire!tness3

&ysi!al roxi'ity, t&e nu'-er of otential vi!ti's, t&e indeenden!e of 'y &el fro' ot&ers, and

so on3and arguing t&at none of t&e' is 'orally signi1!ant.8F $ 'oral !ategory lie t&at of 9i''ediate e'ergen!y, it 'ig&t -e o-e!ted, is itself 'orally signi1!ant, and it 'ay &ave a

signi1!an!e -eyond t&at of any of t&e !o'onents t&at a redu!tive analysis of it 'ig&t identify. One

'ig&t as %ell argue t&at torture is not 'orally %rong on t&e grounds t&at neit&er t&e deli-erate

ini!tion of ain, nor a!ting to se!ure ones o%n ends, nor any of t&e ot&er arti!ular features %&i!&

!ases of torture 'ay &ave in !o''on, is -y itself 'orally signi1!ant.84

/&at # no% need to s&o% is t&at -ot& for's of !&allenge !an -e 'et. # -egin %it& t&e 1rst,

!on!erning t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons reasons, and t&en return to t&e *uestion a-out

!ountervailing !onsiderations.

#n C&ater 8, # distinguis&ed t%o dierent %ays in %&i!& 'y relations&i to so'eone elses need

'ig&t -e dire!t or i''ediate: if &e is rig&t in front of 'e, &is need is i''ediately resented to 'e,and if 'y &el %ill not -e 'ediated -y so'e furt&er agen!y, # !an &el &i' dire!tly.a &e follo%ing

dis!ussion !overs -ot&. # s&all tal si'ly a-out 9i''edia!y, sin!e it %ould -e tedious to ee

'aing t&is distin!tion6 -ut t&e oints # 'ae aly e*ually to i''edia!y or dire!tness in -ot& of

t&ese for's.

#''edia!y and t&e Content of a Bene1!ent Persons 7eason

# &ave -een !lai'ing t&at a -ene1!ent ersons reason for &eling ot&er eole is t&is: it is in t&eir

interests to -e &eled. But %&y not t&in t&at t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons reason is 'ore

restri!ted t&an t&at3t&at it in!ludes a furt&er !ondition of i''edia!y or dire!tness &ere are

various ossi-ilities to !onsider &ere, given t&e dierent %ays of selling out t&is furt&er !ondition.

o%ever, t&e ro-le' %it& all of t&e' is funda'entally

end .28

t&e sa'e. &ey 'ae t&e reason to &el ot&er eole too self+regarding for a!tion 'otivated in t&is

%ay to -e sensi-ly t&oug&t of as -ene1!en!e.

o see t&is ro-le', %e !an start %it& a dierent suggestion3one t&at does not 'ention

i''edia!y at all. #t is so'eti'es suggested t&at, if # &el so'eone out of sy'at&y, # a' taing

t&e fa!t t&at # feel lie &eling as a good reason for doing so.8@ # 'yself t&in t&is is a !ari!ature of

sy'at&eti!ally 'otivated a!tion.8H o%ever, it does see' rig&t to t&in t&at, against any a!tions

t&at %ere 'otivated in t&is %ay, t&ere %ould -e a for!eful !riti!is': t&is 'otivation %ould -e

unduly self+regarding.8I $ good reason for a!tion is a !onsideration t&at !ounts in its favour3

s&o%s %&y it is %ort& erfor'ing.8D But t&ere is a -ig dieren!e -et%een t&ining t&at %&at

seas in favour of t&e a!tion is %&at it gets &i', and t&ining t&at %&at favours it is a fa!t a-out

'e: t&e agree'ent -et%een t&e a!tion and 'y feelings. &is is not to say t&at sy'at&eti! agents,

on t&is i!ture, oug&t to -e a!!used of &aving t&e sel1s& ai' of &eling ot&er eole only for t&e

sae of t&eir o%n enoy'ent: t&ese agents, unlie sel1s& ones, %ould still &ave &eling ot&er

eole as t&e ulti'ate ai' of t&eir a!tion. But t&eir reason for erfor'ing an a!tion %it& t&is

ulti'ate ai' %ould -e self+regarding, in a %ay t&at 'aes it s&arly dierent fro' so'eone %&o

sees t&e -ene1t to t&e ot&er erson as %&at !ounts in favour of a!ting.8=

<o% turn -a! to t&e roosals for 'aing i''edia!y art of t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons

reason for &eling. /&y not say t&at a -ene1!ent ersons reason for &eling is t&at so'eonesneed is i''ediately resented to 'e &e ro-le' is again t&at t&is oers a fa!t a-out 'e as t&e



reason for &eling, rat&er t&an t&e good it %ould do for &i'. But t&ere is surely a s&ar dieren!e

-et%een eole %&o see t&e 1rst and t&ose %&o see t&e se!ond of t&ese t%o dierent fa!ts as

%&at 'aes t&e a!tion %ort& erfor'ing. $nd given t&e dieren!e -et%een t&e t%o, %e surely

oug&t to t&in of -ene1!en!e roer as taing t&e ot&er+regarding !onsideration as its reason,

rat&er t&an t&e self+regarding one. $s -efore, t&e o-e!tion is not t&at a!tion 'otivated in t&e self+

regarding %ay %ould -e si'le sel1s&ness: it %ould still -e a!tion t&e ulti'ate ai' of %&i!& is to&el ot&ers rat&er t&an yourself. But t&ere does see' to -e a -ig dieren!e -et%een taing as your

reason for t&is ai' t&e -ene1t to t&e', and taing as your reason t&e relation -et%een t&e' and

you.

&e !o'laint a-out t&is roosal is t&at it rela!es a fa!t a-out %&at t&e a!tion does for t&e

needy erson %it& a fa!t a-out 'e. Ot&er roosals in t&e sa'e sirit 'ig&t see' to avoid t&is

o-e!tion. /&y not suggest t&at a -ene1!ent ersons reason is -ot& t&at &e needs it and also t&at

&is need is i''ediately resented to 'e &is does not rela!e a fa!t a-out &i' %it& a fa!t a-out

'e: it 'aes t&e reason into t&e !onun!tion of t&e t%o. Or %&y not say t&at t&e reason for &eling

is t&at t&is %ill address &is i''ediately resented need ere, t&e t&oug&t is t&at t&e i''ediate

resentation

end .22

*uali1es t&e !ontent of t&e reason6 not t&at it rela!es t&e ot&er ersons need as a reason

altoget&er.

&ese roosals %ill 'ae it inaroriate to exress t&e o-e!tion as a !o'laint a-out

rela!e'ent. But t&e underlying o-e!tion alies to t&e' as %ell. o identify t&e !ontent of a

reason for a given a!tion is to se!ify %&at it is a-out t&e a!tion t&at 'aes it %ort& erfor'ing.

But if # !ould save so'eones life in front of 'e, %&at 'aes t&e a!tion %ort& erfor'ing is t&e

good it does to &i'. #t is not as if t&e a!tion only -e!o'es %ort& erfor'ing if %e !onoin or *ualify

t&is fa!t a-out &i' %it& so'e furt&er fa!t a-out 'e. #f it is rig&t for 'e to resond %it& &el, %&at #

oug&t to -e resonding to3%&at # oug&t to see as re!o''ending t&e a!tion3is &is need6 not &is

need toget&er %it& so'e furt&er fa!ts a-out 'yself. ;o alt&oug& t&e for' of t&ese furt&er

roosals is dierent, t&e o-e!tion to t&e' is t&e sa'e. &ey 'ae a -ene1!ent ersons reason

too self+regarding.

# a' not !lai'ing t&at no 'orally i'ortant reason !an !ontain a referen!e to t&e agent. &e !lai'

is si'ly t&at so'e su!& reasons3t&e ones it is !&ara!teristi! of a -ene1!ent erson to re!ogni?e3

do not. &us, !onsider a situation in %&i!& you &ave to !&oose -et%een saving a stranger and

saving your o%n !&ild. &e fa!t t&at t&is is your !&ild 'ay give you reasons over and a-ove t&e

fa!ts a-out &is need. $t least, not&ing t&at &as -een said so far revents us fro' a!!eting t&is.

$nd if t&is is true, it !ould exlain %&y it %ould -e %rong not to save your o%n !&ild in su!& a

situation. $!!eting t&is is *uite !o'ati-le %it& 'y argu'ent. &e !ontent of so'e of 'y reasonsto &el ot&er eole 'ay 'ae referen!e to 'e. /&at # &ave -een denying is t&at t&e only reasons

t&ere are to &el ot&er eole are ones t&at 'ae referen!e to 'e. &e fa!ts a-out ot&er eoles

need do rovide reasons indeendently of fa!ts a-out 'e3%&et&er or not t&ere are also fa!ts

a-out 'e t&at rovide additional reasons to &el so'e eole.

<on+#''edia!y as a Countervailing Consideration

/e s&ould not treat i''edia!y as art of t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons reason. &e !ontent

of a -ene1!ent ersons reason for &eling ot&er eole is si'ly t&at it is in t&eir interests to -e

&eled. o%ever, %e &ave seen t&at de!lining to &el so'eone %&o needs it does not al%ays

a'ount to a failure of -ene1!en!e. Jor ot&er !onsiderations 'ay !ountervail against t&e for!e of

ot&ers interests as reasons on %&i!& it is aroriate to a!t. #f so, %e need to !onsider t&e

suggestion t&at non+i''edia!y or indire!tness is a !ountervailing !onsideration. ;o'eone %&o



says t&is !ould agree %it& 'y !lai's a-out t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons reason, %&ile still

insisting t&at it !an only -e %rong not to &el so'eone %&en your relations&i to &is need is

i''ediate or dire!t. /&at is t&e ro-le' %it& t&at

end .2F

;o'eone %&o rooses to treat non+i''edia!y as a !ountervailing !onsideration %ill &ave to -etreating it as an under'iner, not an out%eig&er. $n out%eig&er is a stronger reason t&at favours an

alternative a!tion. But non+i''edia!y does not !ount as a reason for doing anyt&ing. &e t&oug&t

&as to -e t&at it lessens t&e extent to %&i!& ot&ers interests rovide 'e %it& a reason3t&at is,

t&at it under'ines t&eir status as a reason for &eling.

Ay earlier exa'le of a !onsideration t&at %ors as an under'iner in relation to -ene1!en!e %as

'ali!iousness. #f your interests are 'ali!ious, t&at under'ines t&eir status as a -ene1!ent ersons

reason for &eling you, -e!ause it s&o%s %&y t&ese are t&e %rong sorts of interests to furt&er. #n

t&at !ase, t&e under'iner %ors to s&o% t&at &eling %ould itself -e 'orally o-e!tiona-le.

o%ever, if non+i''edia!y is roosed as an under'iner, it %ill &ave to %or in a dierent %ay. <o

one t&ins t&at %&en so'eones need is not i''ediately resented to 'e t&at a!tually 'aes it'orally %rong to &el &i'. 7at&er, t&e suggestion 'ust -e t&at t&e reason to &el &i' is %eaened

3not t&at it is a!tually transfor'ed into a reason against &eling &i'.20 <oti!e t&at t&ere are ot&er

under'iners t&at aear to %or t&is %ay3-y %eaening t&e reasons t&ey under'ine, rat&er t&an

9reversing t&eir olarity altoget&er.28 One exa'le is t&e !onsideration t&at a erson &as -roug&t

&is 'isfortune on &i'self. &is does not see' to 'ae it %rong to &el so'eone, -ut does see' to

lessen t&e reason t&ere is to &el. #f # &ave to !&oose -et%een &eling t%o e*ually needy eole,

only one of %&o' &as -roug&t &is 'isfortune on &i'self, t&at !an 'ae it t&e !ase t&at # &ave

'ore reason to &el t&e ot&er.22 &is is not t&e la!e to atte't a full usti1!ation for t&is vie%. But

it is easy to see, in a general %ay, &o% -ringing your 'isfortune on yourself 'aes your interests

less 'orally i'ortant ones to furt&er, given t&e 'oral signi1!an!e of *uestions a-out %&et&er you

are 'orally resonsi-le for, or deserving of, your redi!a'ent. /&y not say so'et&ing si'ilara-out non+i''edia!y

$ reason to &el so'eone is a !onsideration t&at s&o%s %&y &eling &i' is %ort&%&ile3%&at t&ere

is t&at !ounts in favour of &eling &i', 'aes &eling aroriate or rig&t. &e fa!t t&at it is in &is

interests %ill do t&is, unless t&ere are features of &is interests t&at lessen t&e extent to %&i!& t&ey

are %ort& furt&ering3t&e extent to %&i!& t&ey !ount in favour of &eling &i'. #f &is interests are

'ali!ious, or if t&ey are interests in avoiding a 'isfortune &e &as -roug&t on &i'self, t&en t&at

'ig&t &el to lessen t&e extent to %&i!& %e s&ould t&in of t&ose interests as %ort& furt&ering. But

t&e ro-le' is to see &o% t&e fa!t t&at &is interests are not i''ediately resented to 'e !ould do

t&is. o% does t&is fa!t a-out 'y relations&i to t&e' s&o% t&at t&ey are interests -elonging to a

ind t&at it is less 'orally aroriate to resond to #t does not see' to -e a feature of t&ose

interests t&at lessens t&eir %ort&iness to -e furt&ered. #t situates 'e in relation to t&ose interests6

-ut it is not a feature of t&ose interests t&e'selves t&at

end .24

ae!ts t&eir 'oral *uality. #t does not s&o% t&at t&ose interests are -ad, or 'orally *uestiona-le6

nor does it identify so'e furt&er feature of t&e' t&at ree!ts on t&eir %ort&iness to -e furt&ered.

;o it is &ard to see &o% it !ould ae!t t&e extent to %&i!& t&ose interests really do !ount as a

reason for &eling &i'.2F

&is line of atta! invites t&e follo%ing rely. Of !ourse, t&e non+i''edia!y of 'y relations&i to

your interests does not !onstitute so'e non+relational feature of t&ose interests t&at di'inis&es

t&eir for!e as reasons for ot&er eole to &el you. But %&at it s&o%s is %&y t&ere is less reason for

'e to &el you.



# &ave t%o resonses to t&is. &e 1rst is to !&allenge so'eone %&o t&ins t&is to say %&y %e s&ould

agree. /e !an say %&y t&e fa!t t&at your interests are 'ali!ious, or t&e fa!t t&at you &ave -roug&t

your 'isfortunes on yourself, s&ould -e treated as an under'iner. But it is &ard to see %&at furt&er

exlanation !an -e given for %&y non+i''edia!y s&ould -e treated as an under'iner. # a!!et t&at

saying t&is is not a refutation of t&is vie%. Jor it re'ains oen to !lai' t&at t&e status of non+

i''edia!y as an under'iner is si'ly a ri'itive nor'ative fa!t, for %&i!& no furt&er usti1!ation!an -e given. o%ever, &aving a!!eted t&e ossi-ility, # still %ant to no% %&y %e s&ould agree to

say t&is.

&e se!ond resonse, &o%ever, is t&at t&ere is a usti1!ation for not treating non+i''edia!y as an

under'iner in relation to -ene1!en!e. &at usti1!ation is, again, t&at it %ould 'ae t&e attitudes

of a -ene1!ent erson too self+regarding. Earlier, t&is o-e!tion %as raised against t&e suggestion

t&at t&e i''edia!y %it& %&i!& ot&ers need is resented to 'e is art of t&e !ontent of 'y reason

for &eling t&e'. &e !urrent suggestion is dierent. #t is t&at, alt&oug& t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent

ersons reason for &eling ot&er eole is si'ly t&at it is in t&eir interests to -e &eled, t&is

reason is under'ined %&en t&eir need is not i''ediately resented to 'e. &is a'ounts to

!lai'ing t&at fa!ts a-out i''edia!y, alt&oug& not art of t&e !ontent of a -ene1!ent ersons

reason, are !onditions governing t&e strengt& of t&at reason.24 But alt&oug& t&e suggestion is

dierent, it is 'et -y a si'ilar o-e!tion. Jor it still a'ounts to saying t&at t&e extent to %&i!& fa!ts

a-out ot&er eoles interests rovide reasons to &el t&e' is !onditional uon fa!ts a-out 'e.

o%ever, t&e for!e of t&e reason for 'e to &el so'eone %&o needs it !o'es fro' a fa!t a-out

&i', not a fa!t a-out 'e. $t least, t&is is true of t&e reasons distin!tive of -ene1!en!e. &ere 'ay

-e furt&er fa!ts a-out 'e t&at rovide extra reasons to &el ot&er eole3fa!ts a-out t&e se!ial

relations&is in %&i!& # 'ay stand to t&e'. But %&at is distin!tive of -ene1!en!e is an attitude of

re!ogni?ing fa!ts a-out ot&er eole, and not fa!ts a-out 'e, as resenting 'e %it& reason to &el

t&e'.

# !on!lude t&at non+i''edia!y s&ould not -e treated as !ountervailing against t&e for!e of ot&ers

interests as a reason for &eling t&e'. &ere is

end .2@

no usti1!ation for treating non+i''edia!y as a !ountervailing !onsideration6 and furt&er'ore,

t&ere is a ositive !ase against doing so.

Lou 'ig&t a!!et t&is -ut t&in t&at it overloos so'et&ing i'ortant. rue, it is &ard to see &o%

t&e non+i''edia!y of 'y relations&i to so'eone %&o needs &el !an ae!t t&e status of t&e

reasons for &eling &i', and t&at 'aes it &ard to see &o% it !ould -e a !onsideration t&at

!ountervails against t&ose reasons. On t&e ot&er &and, it is very easy to see &o% t&is !onsideration

ae!ts 'y relations&i to t&e reasons for &eling &i'. $nd isnt t&at 'orally signi1!ant

$!tually, # t&in it is. # s&all !o'e -a! to t&is s&ortly.

Parti!ularity and Bene1!en!e

#t 'ig&t -e t&oug&t t&at an atta! on t&e life+saving analogy s&ould fo!us not on i''edia!y or

dire!tness, -ut on so'e ot&er fa!tor t&at dierentiates t&e dire!t saving of life fro' giving 'oney

to aid agen!ies. &e next t%o !&aters %ill !onsider various ossi-ilities. But t&ere is one t&oug&t

t&at %e oug&t to deal %it& straig&t a%ay. &is is t&at %&at 'aes t&e t%o !ases relevantly dierent

is not t&e i''edia!y %it& %&i!& t&e need is resented, -ut t&e arti!ularity of t&e erson to -e

&eled.2@

/&en %e des!ri-ed -ene1!en!e -y saying t&at it involves taing ot&ers interests as a reason for&eling t&e', %e sa% t&at t&is 'ust -e read extensionally. $ -ene1!ent erson is not so'eone



%&ose !on!ern is for ot&er eoles interests, under t&at des!rition. 7at&er, s&e is so'eone %&ose

!on!ern, given so'e arti!ular erson %&o needs &el, %ill -e for &is interests. o%ever, %&en #

t&in a-out &eling so'e of t&e %orlds needy eole -y giving 'oney to an aid agen!y, it is not as

if t&ere is any arti!ular individual to %&o' # a' resonding. $nd t&is, it 'ig&t -e t&oug&t, is %&at

exlains %&y not giving t&e 'oney does not a'ount to a failure of -ene1!en!e. Bene1!en!e

involves resonding to t&e needs of arti!ular individuals6 it is dierent fro' t&e ind of generali?ed&ilant&roy t&at rea!ts to ot&er eoles need in general. /&en # a' a%are of t&e need of so'e

arti!ular erson, and fail to &el alt&oug& it %ould &ave -een easy to do so, t&at !an -e a failure

of -ene1!en!e, and -e %rong. But %&en # 'erely refrain fro' resonding to ot&er eoles need in

general, t&is is ust refraining fro' &ilant&roy, and it is not %rong.2H

o%ever, t&e rely to t&is !an -e s&orter. &in of %&at %e s&ould say a-out i''ediately

resented e'ergen!ies %&ere no arti!ular -ene1!iary of 'y &el !an -e identi1ed. ;uose #

!onfront a disaster in %&i!& 'any lives are t&reatened. $ res!ue tea' is organi?ed6 if # oin it,

several 'ore lives %ill -e saved, -ut even if # oin, not all %ill -e. #n oining, # 'ay &ave no idea

%&i!& arti!ular individuals %ill -ene1t fro' 'y &el6 if # refuse, it 'ay -e i'ossi-le to say %&i!&

of t&e t&reatened lives %ere lost as a result.

end .2H

o%ever, if !ontri-uting to t&e res!ue %ould not -e a large sa!ri1!e, t&en refusing to oin it see's

no less %rong t&an refusing to save a single life. o ut t&e oint at its strongest, t&in of an

eart&*uae, %&ere &el is needed to dig t&roug& t&e ru--le of a !ollased -uilding. <ot&ing is

no%n a-out t&e identity of t&e eole in t&e -uilding6 t&ere 'ig&t even -e no one to save. But if

'y assistan!e %it& t&e res!ue eort is needed, and it is not a -ig sa!ri1!e to as of 'e, it 'ay still

-e %rong to refuse. <oti!e &ere, t&oug&, t&at a -ene1!ent ersons reason for &eling in t&is !ase is

si'ly t&is: t&ere is so'et&ing # !an easily do t&at 'ig&t &el so'eone else greatly. Jailing to treat

t&is reason as de!isive %ould -e %rong, in t&e a-sen!e of !ountervailing !onsiderations. #t is si'ly

a 'istae to t&in t&at a -ene1!ent ersons reason 'ust i! out arti!ular -ene1!iaries, and t&at%&en you !annot do t&is, refusing to &el !an involve no failure of -ene1!en!e.

&ere is a furt&er oint t&at %e s&all need to return to. #n t&e !ir!u'stan!es ust des!ri-ed, it is not

ossi-le to identify a arti!ular -ene1!iary of 'y &el. # do t&in t&is is enoug& to deal %it& t&e

o-e!tion t&at -ene1!en!e re*uires an a%areness of t&e needs of arti!ular individuals to %&o' #

a' resonding. o%ever, t&ere is a dierent -ut si'ilar t&oug&t t&at &as not yet -een addressed.

&is is t&at, in !ases of t&e ind ust des!ri-ed, if # a!t t&ere is a lieli&ood t&at so'e arti!ular

individuals %ill -e -etter o as a result (%&et&er # a' a%are of t&eir identities in advan!e or not).

But if # give 'oney to an aid agen!y, t&ere are no arti!ular individuals %&o %ill -e -etter o as a

result of 'y adding to t&e agen!ys overall ool of funds. # dis!uss t&is o-e!tion in C&ater 4.

2.4 E AO7$ ;#G<#J#C$<CE OJ #AAEM#$CL

#n defending t&e life+saving analogy, # &ave argued t&at t&e reasons %e &ave for t&ining t&at it !an

-e %rong to let so'eone die rig&t in front of you are e*ually reasons for t&ining t&at it is %rong to

!ontri-ute not&ing to aid agen!ies in order to address t&e life+t&reatening need of eole far a%ay.

o%ever, # &ave already 'entioned 'y dou-ts a-out %&et&er not &eling at a distan!e is as -ad as

failing to &el so'eone rig&t in front of you.- # no% %ant to say so'e 'ore a-out t&is. #t is

!onsistent %it& %&at # &ave -een arguing to a!!et t&at t&e i''edia!y of 'y relations&i to

so'eone elses need does 'ae a 'oral dieren!e, in t%o %ays.

&e 1rst of t&ese is a oint # alluded to a s&ort %&ile ago. $lt&oug& t&e fa!t t&at so'eones need is

not i''ediately resented to 'e does not under'ine t&e extent to %&i!& &is interests rovide a

reason for &eling &i', it !ertainly ae!ts 'y relations&i to t&at reason. &is is sy!&ologi!ally



end .2I

i'ortant. Clearly, it is a 'atter of sy!&ologi!al fa!t t&at our 'otivation to a!t on t&reats to ot&er

eoles lives is triggered far 'ore easily %&en t&ey are rig&t in front of us.2I #t is not at all

surrising t&at %e resond 'ore readily to t&reats to eoles lives %&en t&ey are resented to us

i''ediately, and %e !an &el t&e' dire!tly. &e reason 'ay not -e dierent %&en it is resented

to 'e i''ediately, -ut it is 'ore salient, and t&at 'aes it 'ore 'otivationally engaging.2D $nd

t&is 'ay -e not only sy!&ologi!ally i'ortant, -ut 'orally i'ortant too. Jor t&e salien!e of a

reason 'ay ae!t &o% reasona-le it is to exe!t us to attend to it, and &o% reasona-le it is to

!riti!i?e us for not doing so'et&ing a-out it.2=

Jor an illustration of t&is oint, !onsider %&at %e s&ould say a-out ast ra!ti!es %&i!& %ere on!e

!o''onla!e, -ut %&i!& &ave no% rig&tly -een a-andoned: slavery is t&e o-vious exa'le. 7a!ial

and religious slavery see'ed nor'al to eole gro%ing u and re!eiving t&eir 'oral edu!ation in

!ir!u'stan!es in %&i!& it &ad -e!o'e art of t&e a!!eted so!ial fa-ri!.F0 $nd t&is fa!t see's

'orally signi1!ant. /&ere it is un*uestioningly taen for granted t&at outsiders interests are

'orally less i'ortant t&an t&ose of ones o%n grou, t&ey 'ay si'ly not &ave t&e sa'e salien!e

as aroriate o-e!ts of !on!ern. &is does not&ing to %eaen t&e argu'ent for t&ining t&atslavery is %rong, for it does not&ing to %eaen t&e reasons for rese!ting eoles li-erty,

irrese!tive of t&eir ra!e or religion. But it 'ay ae!t our udge'ent of &o% -ad t&e eole %&o

a!*uies!ed in su!& ra!ti!es %ere, and our udge'ent of &o% -la'e%ort&y t&ey %ere for u&olding

t&e'.

&ere are dierent %ays of exressing t&is oint. #t see's to 'e t&at t&e 'ost satisfa!tory is to say

t&at t&e a!tions of so'e slave&olders in t&e ast %ere less -la'e%ort&y t&an 'y a!tions %ould -e

if # enslaved so'eone, -ut t&at t&ey %ere no less %rong. ;aying t&at t&ey %ere no less %rong

exresses t&e fa!t t&at t&e reason against doing %&at t&ey did %as ust as strong3for it %as t&e

sa'e3as t&e reason t&ere is for 'e not to enslave anyone today. &e fa!ts a-out slavery t&at

!ount as reasons against it %ere no %eaer in t&e ast t&an t&ey are no%6 -ut it 'ay -e lessreasona-le to &ave exe!ted so'e ast slave&olders %&o lived t&en to attend to t&ese reasons

t&an it is to exe!t 'e to attend to t&e' today. $not&er %ay to ut t&e sa'e oint is to e'loy a

distin!tion -et%een o-e!tive and su-e!tive %rongness, and say t&at t&e a!tions of an!ient

slave&olders %ere no less o-e!tively %rong -ut %ere less su-e!tively %rong.F8 Or one 'ig&t ust

sideste t&ese ver-al issues, and say si'ly t&at t&e reason not to enslave eole %as no %eaer,

-ut t&at it is reasona-le to level less !riti!is' against t&e' t&an against 'e.

o%ever %e des!ri-e it, t&is distin!tion see's i'ortant. o% reasona-le it is to !riti!i?e so'eone

for a!ting on a reason is one t&ing6 -ut t&e strengt& of t&e reason itself is anot&er. &is gives us t&e

1rst rese!t in %&i!& i''edia!y 'aes a 'oral dieren!e. &e failure to resond to an

end .2D

e'ergen!y t&at !onfronts you dire!tly ex&i-its a det& of indieren!e to t&e interests of ot&er

eole t&at 'aes 'oral !riti!is' 'ore aroriate t&an it is in relation to t&e failure to a!t in

resonse to 'ore distant need. #f t&e !onsiderations one oug&t to -e a!ting on are 'ore vividly

ines!aa-le, t&e failure to resond to t&e' is 'ore -la'e%ort&y.

Of !ourse, if t&is oened t&e %ay to arguing t&at not &eling at a distan!e is not -la'e%ort&y at all,

t&at %ould tae 'u!& of t&e sting out of 'y !on!lusion t&at it is %rong. #f t&is %ere a !ase of

9-la'eless %rongdoing t&en, alt&oug& %e s&ould a!!et t&at t&ere is a 'oral !ase against doing

not&ing, %e s&ould not t&in ill of anyone3in!luding ourselves3for doing not&ing.F2 o%ever, #

!annot see any lausi-ility in going t&at far. &e non+i''edia!y of t&e needs of distant strangers

s&o%s t&at it is not reasona-le to !riti!i?e us for -eing less engaged -y t&e' t&an -y t&e needs of



so'eone rig&t in front of us. But it does not exlain %&y %e s&ould not -e !riti!i?ed if %e ignore

t&e' altoget&er.

&ere is a se!ond %ay in %&i!& i''edia!y 'ig&t still 'ae a 'oral dieren!e, !o'ati-ly %it& 'y

argu'ent. <oti!e t&at, for all # &ave said, i''edia!y 'ig&t still 'ae a dieren!e not ust to t&e

-la'e%ort&iness of our a!tions, -ut to t&eir %rongness too. # &ave argued t&at t&e non+i''edia!y

of 'y relations&i to so'eones need does not lessen t&e reason t&ere is to &el &i', and # a' not

a-out to retra!t t&at !lai'. But t&is still leaves oen t&e ossi-ility t&at relations&is of i''edia!y

!reate furt&er reasons for &eling eole. 7e'e'-er: # &ave not -een 'aing a -lanet !lai' t&at

no 'orally signi1!ant reason !ontains a referen!e to t&e agent %&o &as it. 7at&er, t&e !lai' is t&at

!ertain 'orally signi1!ant reasons3reasons of -ene1!en!e3do not. $s # noted earlier, t&is leaves

oen t&e ossi-ility t&at fa'ily relations&is !reate reasons to &el eole. #n a si'ilar vein, t&ere

is no o-sta!le to t&e !lai' t&at relations&is of i''edia!y rovide furt&er reasons to &el eole.

Of !ourse, not&ing &as -een said &ere to suort t&is vie%.FF But e*ually, not&ing &as -een said to

refute it. #t &as -een argued t&at, sin!e reasons of -ene1!en!e for 'e to &el needy eole are

indeendent of fa!ts a-out 'e, t&e failure to resond to life+t&reatening need at a distan!e is a

failure of -ene1!en!e, and is 'orally %rong. o%ever, it is !onsistent %it& t&is to t&in t&at fa!ts

a-out 'y i''ediate relations&i to a needy erson !an rovide furt&er reasons to &el. $nd if

t&ere are furt&er reasons to &el, t&at %ould lend suort to t&e vie% t&at it is 'ore %rong not to.

2.@ /$ #<M OJ $7GUAE< #; #;

&at !o'letes t&e su-stantive argu'ent of t&is !&ater. $ natural *uestion to as a-out it

!on!erns its t&eoreti!al resuositions. Lou 'ig&t t&in

end .2=

t&at, as an argu'ent in alied et&i!s, it 'ust -e assu'ing so'e general 'oral t&eory3a version

of !onse*uentialis', er&as, or so'e ind of 9virtue t&eory3and alying t&at to t&e arti!ular

!ase under dis!ussion. o%ever, # do not resent t&e argu'ent t&is %ay, -e!ause # do not t&in itrelies on any su!& t&eory. #t 'ay -e &elful if # -riey exlain %&y not -efore %e !ontinue.

# &ave already des!ri-ed t&e argu'ents t&ree+stage stru!ture. &is does involve a ind of

nor'ative t&eori?ing. $fter all, it generali?es a-out our reasons, and dra%s !on!lusions fro' t&is

a-out t&e nor'ative !o''it'ents %e are usti1ed in &olding. o%ever, if t&is is a for' of

t&eori?ing, it is only a reli'inary one. #t is reli'inary in t%o dierent di'ensions, %&i!& %e 'ig&t

t&in of as its det& and its s!oe. #t la!s det&, -e!ause it only sees to generali?e a-out %&at

%e tae to -e good reasons6 a deeer t&eory %ould -e one t&at ai's to vindi!ate !on!lusions a-out

%&at really are good reasons. #t is true t&at # &ave -een assu'ing t&at t&e !onvi!tions # a' %oring

fro' !an ulti'ately -e vindi!ated. But # &ave not taen sides on t&e 'ore !ontroversial *uestion

&o% our !onvi!tions a-out reasons are to -e vindi!ated. #n addition to t&is, t&eori?ing of t&e t&ree+stage ind is reli'inary in s!oe, sin!e it taes only so'e of our udge'ents, and restri!ts itself to

identifying our usti1!ations for t&e'. &e fullest ind of t&eory %ould -e one t&at ai's to !over

'oral udge'ents, and t&e reasons for and against t&e', *uite generally. $t its 'ost a'-itious, a

nor'ative 'oral t&eory %ill ai' to -e !o'lete in -ot& of t&ese di'ensions, giving us a fully

vindi!ated, !o'letely general des!rition of good 'oral reasons. E*uied %it& t&is, %e %ould

t&en -e a-le to invoe it to resolve any 'oral !ontroversy de1nitively.

/&at &as e'erged fro' t&is dis!ussion is 'u!& 'ore 'odest: it is a rudi'entary t&eory of

-ene1!en!e. &is t&eory !ontains t%o !o'onents: a general !&ara!teri?ation of t&e ind of

!on!ern distin!tive of -ene1!en!e, and a des!rition of %&at is !o''on to t&e inds of

!onsideration t&at !an roerly !ountervail in relation to t&is !on!ern. #t a'ounts only to a

rudi'entary t&eory: an outline to -e 1lled in. Jilling it in %ould 'ean giving a su-stantive a!!ount

of ust %&i!& !onsiderations do !ountervail in relation to t&is for' of !on!ern, and t&at is not



so'et&ing # &ave atte'ted. # &ave soug&t to exlain %&at a !onsideration %ould &ave to -e lie in

order to -e intelligi-ly treated as !ountervailing in relation to -ene1!en!e, -ut not to give

in!ontroverti-le exa'les of !onsiderations t&at do !ountervail.F4

#gnoring 'y argu'ents restri!tion in s!oe 'ig&t lead you to see it as involving a !o''it'ent to a

%elfarist version of !onse*uentialis': a nor'ative t&eory t&at lins rig&t a!tion to t&e rodu!tion of

t&e &ig&est level of %elfare.F@ o%ever, 'y dis!ussion of -ene1!en!e assu'es only t&at ot&er

eoles %elfare is 'orally i'ortant. #t is not !o''itted to t&e 'u!&

end .F0

stronger !lai' t&at everyt&ing t&at is 'orally i'ortant is i'ortant -e!ause of its !ontri-ution to

eoles %elfare.FH

&e ot&er 'ain te'tation %ill -e to see t&is argu'ent as involving a !o''it'ent to a

distin!tively 9virtue+et&i!al aroa!& to nor'ative 'oral t&eory. o%ever, # do not t&in t&at is

rig&t eit&er. rue, t&e argu'ent does !on!ern -ene1!en!e, %&i!& is a *uality -ot& of !&ara!ter and

of a!tion. o%ever, # !annot see t&at it !ontains any !o''it'ent to !lai'ing a riority of t&e

assess'ent of !&ara!ter over t&at of a!tion.FI $nd true, 'y referred usage of a virtue+ter' lie

9-ene1!en!e 'aes t&e virtues interdeendent: in re*uiring -ene1!en!e to -e dis!ri'inating, # a'

!lai'ing t&at if inusti!e, dis&onesty, or !ari!iousness 'aes an a!tion %rong, it !annot !ount as

-ene1!ent.FD o%ever, t&e argu'ent does not rely on t&is %ay of seaing. #n t&e resent !ontext,

t&e dis!rean!y -et%een 'y o%n usage and t&e rival one allo%ing t&at -ene1!ent a!tions are

so'eti'es %rong !an -e treated as 'erely ver-al. /&at # &ave -een !alling 9-ene1!en!e s&ould

si'ly -e soen of -y so'eone %&o dislies t&is usage as 9t&ose for's of -ene1!en!e t&at it is

%rong for us not to ursue. Ay argu'ents !ould -e re%ritten su-stituting for 9-ene1!en!e t&is

'ore a%%ard &rase %it&out ae!ting anyt&ing of su-stan!e. &ese for's of -ene1!en!e do

re*uire an aroriate sensitivity to !ountervailing !onsiderations, and fro' t&e fa!t t&at an agent

fails to &el so'eone %&en su!& !onsiderations are a-sent, t&e %rongness of &er a!tion %ill -e

inferra-le as -efore. But if it !an -e refor'ulated t&is %ay, t&e argu'ent !annot -e relying on an

inferen!e fro' failure of virtue to %rongness. #ndeed3and t&is is t&e !lin!&ing oint as far as

susi!ions a-out 9virtue et&i!s are !on!erned3t&e %&ole argu'ent !ould -e &rased %it&out using

virtue+ter'inology at all. &e !lai' on %&i!& t&e argu'ent is grounded is t&at %&at %e !riti!i?e

so'eone for, %&en &e fails easily to save so'eones life, is an insu!ient !on!ern for ot&ers

interests. &e *uestion t&at t&at invites is &o% 'u!& !on!ern for ot&ers interests is su!ient or

insu!ient6 and t&e dis!ussion of !ountervailing !onsiderations t&at resonds to t&is *uestion !ould

&ave -een resented %it&out 'entioning -ene1!en!e at all.

# e'&asi?e t&is not -e!ause # t&in it is a 'istae to try to !onstru!t a 'ore general t&eory, -ut

-e!ause t&e t&eoreti!al 'odesty of 'y argu'ent see's to 'e one of its strengt&s. &e argu'ent

&ere is not resuositionless, and it is not i''une to !&allenges of various sorts. #tsresuositions are !lear, and !learly undefended. &ey are t&e udge'ents a-out t&e %rongness

of not saving lives dire!tly at s'all !ost fro' %&i!& %e started, and t&e assu'tion t&at t&e

!onsiderations %e regard as good reasons for t&ese udge'ents are indeed good reasons for t&e'.

o%ever, t&e argu'ent # &ave resented is not resuosing an unde!lared 'oral t&eory. &is adds

to t&e for!e of t&e !&allenge it resents6 for it 'eans t&at it needs to -e seriously engaged %it&,

%&atever your t&eoreti!al orientation.

end .F8

2.H CO<CU;#O<

<ot !ontri-uting to aid agen!ies is lie failing to avert t&reats to life dire!tly: it ex&i-its a failure of -ene1!en!e, and t&at 'aes it 'orally %rong.



&e ri'ary fo!us of 'y argu'ent for t&is !on!lusion &as -een on ans%ering t&e 'et&odologi!al

!&allenge set out in C&ater 83t&e !&allenge of saying %&y, if %e -egin fro' a set of

!o''onla!e udge'ents, %e s&ould generali?e fro' t&e' in a %ay t&at suorts a !ontentious

!on!lusion. # &ave soug&t to do t&is -y giving a lausi-le a!!ount of t&e reason suorting t&ose

!o''onla!e udge'ents3udge'ents a-out t&e %rongness of failing to save a life dire!tly. &e

reason %&y failing to save a life dire!tly is %rong is t&at it dislays an inade*uate !on!ern for ot&ereoles interests, and t&is is e*ually a reason for faulting non+!ontri-ution to aid agen!ies.

# t&in t&is is a good ans%er to t&e 'et&odologi!al !&allenge, -ut it is not a roof of 'y !on!lusion.

#t 'aes a !ase for one !o&erent a!!ount of t&e reason for t&e !o''onla!e udge'ents fro'

%&i!& %e started6 -ut no 'oral udge'ent entails t&e reason %&y it is true. $n argu'ent of t&is

for' %ill never !o'letely refute t&e 'et&odologi!al !&allenge -y s&o%ing t&at no alternative

generali?ation fro' our initial udge'ents is ossi-le. But t&at is not a sensi-le ai'. /&at is

i'ortant is %&et&er any alternative generali?ation gives a 'ore lausi-le a!!ount of t&e reason

%&y t&e initial udge'ents are true6 and # &ave -een 'aing a !ase for t&ining not.

&e argu'ent # &ave develoed is an attra!tive one, for t&ree 'ain reasons. Jirst, it !atures t&e

intuitive for!e of one of t&e 'ain lines of t&oug&t t&at leads 'any eole to t&e sa'e !on!lusion:non+!ontri-ution to aid agen!ies is %rong si'ly -e!ause it is a failure of t&ose %&o &ave 'ore

t&an enoug& to resond to ot&ers deserate need. $nd it does so %&ile 'eeting t&e

'et&odologi!al !&allenge invited -y ot&er atte'ts to develo t&is line of t&oug&t !arefully.

;e!ondly, t&e style of argu'ent # &ave used &as a ind of t&eoreti!al neutrality t&at 'eans it is free

of 'ore general t&eoreti!al !o''it'ents, and needs to -e taen seriously -y roonents of any

lausi-le 'oral t&eory. $nd t&irdly, it generates a lausi-ly *uali1ed !on!lusion, t&at alt&oug& non+

!ontri-ution to aid agen!ies is %rong, it is not as -la'e%ort&y as letting so'eone die in front of

you, and er&as not as %rong eit&er.

o%ever, in order to arrive at t&is !on!lusion, t%o assu'tions are re*uired. One is t&at

!ontri-utions to aid agen!ies %ill indeed avert t&reats to eoles lives. $nd t&e ot&er is t&at t&ereis no ot&er !ountervailing !onsideration, -eyond non+i''edia!y or indire!tness, t&at sulies a

'orally relevant dieren!e -et%een &eling a erson dire!tly and giving 'oney to an aid agen!y.

Bot& of t&ese assu'tions, t&oug&, are fre*uently !&allenged. #t is o-e!ted t&at -y feeding t&e

%orlds surlus oulation no%, %e are si'ly !ontri-uting to %orse ro-le's in t&e future, t&at

resonsi-ility for t&e relief of overty -elongs to govern'ents rat&er t&an

end .F2

to individuals, t&at t&e a-sen!e of roer -irt& !ontrol ra!ti!es in oor !ountries 'aes t&e'

resonsi-le for t&eir o%n lig&t, and t&at !&arity degrades eole as o-e!ts of our ity. $id

agen!ies are a!!used of doing e!ono'i! da'age, !olluding %it& !orrution %it&in t&e !ountries

t&ey are suosed to -e &eling, and of -eing driven -y t&e -usiness i'erative of feeding t&eiro%n gro%t& rat&er t&an rodu!ing any long+ter' -ene1ts for t&e %orlds oor. Aoreover, even if

you a!!et t&at aid agen!ies a!tivity as a %&ole averts t&reats to eoles lives, you 'ig&t still

dou-t %&et&er any one individuals !ontri-ution to t&ose agen!ies does t&at.

&e next t%o !&aters dis!uss t&ese t%o assu'tions in t&e lig&t of o-e!tions su!& as t&e ones

ust 'entioned. &e se!ond assu'tion, # s&all argue, is rig&t, and t&e o-e!tions to it fail. &e 1rst,

on t&e ot&er &and, 'ay -e %rong3-ut even if it is, t&at does not soil t&e argu'ent. #f you are

already disosed to -elieve t&ese t&ings, you !an turn dire!tly to C&ater @. &ere # tae u t&e

*uestion t&at arises next: o% de'anding a 'oral outloo does t&is argu'ent leave us %it&

end .FF

cullity-demandasmorales delos ricos

Documents