Question

Which of the follow is an essential premise in Singer's argument?

People should be responsible for themselves, so we have no obligation to help end the suffering of others unless we wish to do so.

We have a duty to try to help those who are suffering deeply, whether or not our actions will make any difference because the harm is so great.

If we can prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we have an obligation to do so.

We are responsible for stopping any suffering that we have caused, even at high cost to ourselves.

Answer 1

Peter Singer had written an essay "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" in 1971 and was the outcome of the famine of the Bangladesh War Refugees. Singer felt that people who were in a position to help others i.e. in a more affluent position, were obligated to do so. It doesn't matter whether the person whom we are helping is someone we know personally or somebody who lives a thousasnd miles away. When a person requires the most basic help in terms of food or shelter, they must be helped.
   Thus, the essential premise in Singer's argument is that "If we can prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anythin of comparable moral importance, we have an obligation to do so."