the distant needy

from the book, ethics in practice third edition.
Singer argues that our obligations to the distant needy are strong indeed. he thinks that giving to charity isn’t just a nice , virtuous thing to do, but rather, a moral obligation: if we don’t give, then we’re doing something morally wrong, morally as wrong as leaving a child to drawn in the shallow pond, why does singer think this? what is his argument? what exactly, is his conclusion about how much we awe the distant needy? what are the strongest objections that you can raise to his argument? what should we conclude?

Still stressed from student homework?
Get quality assistance from academic writers!