1. Suffering and death are bad.
2. If it is in our power to prevent something bad, without sacrificing something of comparable moral importance, morally speaking we should do so.
3. Each one of us can prevent death and suffering, without sacrificing something of comparable moral importance, by donating to reputable aid agencies.
4. Therefore, each one of us morally should donate to reputable aid agencies.

Instructions

For this module's VoiceThread please respond to ONE of the following sets of questions (A or B).

A:If you think this is a good argument (i.e. basically correct)....

Why is the argument convincing?

How you would respond to the objection that the view Singer is promoting is too demanding?

B: If you think the argument is flawed....

Which premise do reject and why do you reject it?(note:the premises are the numbered sentences -- (1), (2), (3) -- that come before the "Therefore")

How would you respond to the idea that morality is impartial, so that ultimately, morally speaking, one should direct the resources in one's possession to those who need them most?