Profile: Peter Singer

Peter Singer is an Australian philosopher who is famous in philosophical circles for his preference utilitarian theory, and more generally for some of the radical implications of this theory, such as his views on animal liberation and abortion.

Who is deserving of moral consideration?

His book, Animal Liberation (1975) began by moving from women’s rights to animal rights. He comments on a criticism made of Mary Wollenscraft’s case for women’s rights, that were one to follow this argument one would give rights to brutes. Singer widens the circle of moral consideration from women to animals. Essentially he developed an argument that they should have equal consideration. Failure to do so was an example of speciesism, discrimination on the basis of species. He also stressed that the reason for giving animals equal consideration was that they could feel pain, not that they had a level of intelligence, though he notes some of the great apes have shown considerable intelligence through specially developed communication systems.

“All the arguments to prove man’s superiority cannot shatter this hard fact: in suffering the animals are our equals.” (Singer, 1975)

We should not show mentally ‘retarded’ human beings less consideration than others. So we cannot give moral significance only to those creatures who have high intelligence or mental capability. In fact we tend to give even more consideration to humans that have not yet developed high levels of intelligence or ability such as newborn babies. However there is still a degree of calculation going on and some have pointed out that under Singer’s equal consideration system an animal suffering great pain is more deserving of action than a human suffering a little pain. Many animals lives together may in fact be worth a human life. In short there is no intrinsic or inviolable aspect of Singer’s theory. He does not give human beings a unique moral status and there might always be a greater good that justifies neglecting a human.

“Animal Liberation will require greater altruismon the part of human beings than any other liberation movement. The animals themselves are incapable of demanding their own liberation, or of protesting against their condition with votes, demonstrations, or bombs. Human beings have the power to continue to oppress other species forever, or until we make this planet unsuitable for living beings.” (Singer, 1975)

How do we apply equal consideration?

Equal consideration of interests does not mean equal treatment of all those with interests. Different interests warrant different treatment. Everyone has an interest in avoiding pain while few have an interest in developing their abilities. A starving person and a hungry person both have a interest in food but the starving person’s interest demands more urgent treatment.

Which interests are more important?

Singer suggests a number:
Avoiding pain
Developing one’s abilities
Basic needs for food and shelter
Enjoying personal relationships
Being free to pursue projects

Above all else, a capacity for suffering or the enjoyment of happiness is the thing that qualifies a being for equal consideration. Trivial interests and pleasures do not have any priority.

Singer does think that ethics have a degree of universality. Ethical conduct is justifiable if it addresses a larger audience. One must love thy neighbour as thyself, by giving others equal interest to oneself.

Singer and Abortion

For Singer, one’s right to life is intrinsically bound with one’s ability to hold preferences, which means it is linked to the extent to which a being can feel pain or pleasure. Singer thinks that the human being develops gradually, that it becomes more human and alive at some point after conception making it almost impossible to identify the precise moment. However, he is more controversial than some opponents of abortion because he rejects the claim that it is wrong to take innocent life:

“[The argument that a fetus is not alive] is a resort to a convenient fiction that turns an evidently living being into one that legally is not alive. Instead of accepting such fictions, we should recognise that the fact that a being is human, and alive, does not in itself tell us whether it is wrong to take that being’s life.”

It is the weight of the preference of the mother against the preference of the fetus that should be weighed. As a capacity to experience suffering increases with growth the grown and born mother will have a much greater capacity than the fetus, whose preferences are only potential at this stage. Abortion is morally permissible, therefore. More radically, Singer applies this to newborns who he determines lack essential characteristics of personhood including rationality, autonomy and self–consciousness. Killing a newborn, he thinks, is not the same as killing a born being.

Singer’s most recent book, The Life You Can Save, makes the argument that it is a clear-cut moral imperative for citizens of developed countries to give more to charitable causes that help the poor. While Singer acknowledges the problems inherent in aid and charity of ensuring that money goes where it is most needed and used effectively, his original premise (that people should give more) is not reconciled with these problems in mind

Singer and Poverty

Singer applies his theory brutally to the rich. If you can save the life of a poor person on the other side of the world by not going to restaurants or buying fancy clothes then you should. If you don’t do this you are a bad person. The inequalities between rich and poor in the world are obscene. You should give at the very least, 5% of you income to charity. The use of our money in this way would change lives radically. It is possible to eradicate poverty and we have to do it.

Singer is consistently unwaveringly radical in the application of his ethics to moral issues that face people.

Short Bibliography

Animal Liberation, Random House, New York, 1975
Practical Ethics, CUP, Cambridge, 1979
The Life you can save: Acting now to end world poverty, Random House, New York, 2009

The best website on Singer is: www.utilitarian.net/singer/
It includes lectures and articles.