ABSTRACT
In November 1971 Peter Singer added a global twist to the centuries-old debate about rich and poor (see Vaughn 2008) when he asked: What are the moral obligations of rich people in developed countries to relieve the hardship of poor people suffering from hunger in developing countries? He proposed a principle that “if it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything morally significant, we ought, morally, to do it”. As justification Singer used this analogy:
An application of this principle would be as follows: if I am walking past a shallow pond and see a child drowning in it, I ought to wade in and pull the child out. This will mean getting my clothes muddy, but this is insignificant, while the death of the child would presumably be a very bad thing.
