.png){kind=icon}
Chapter 17 Essay Questions
1. What is the strongest argument presented in this chapter that we have a moral obligation to provide aid to distant strangers? Explain the argument in your own words. What is the best available objection to this argument? Can that objection be satisfactorily responded to?
2. What is the strongest argument presented in this chapter for restrictive immigration policies? Explain the argument in your own words. What is the best available objection to this argument? Can that objection be satisfactorily responded to?
3. Write an essay discussing Singer’s thought experiment involving Bob and the Bugatti. Describe the decision Bob faces and what Singer thinks Bob is obligated to do. Then, explain what conclusions Singer thinks we should draw from the thought experiment regarding our obligations to reduce poverty and suffering. Do you agree with Singer about this? Defend your answer.
4. Write an essay critically assessing Singer’s view about how much income people should give away. Present Singer’s view and then describe what you think is the strongest objection to the view. Do you think the objection can be overcome? Why or why not?
5. In your own words, explain what advice O’Neil thinks Kantian ethics can give to someone wondering what his or her obligations are to provide aid for victims of famine. How is this different from the advice a utilitarian would give? Which school of thought gets it right, in your opinion? Defend your answer.
6. In your own words, explain the difference between negative and positive duties. Provide examples of each. Do you believe wealthier countries have both negative and positive duties to poorer countries? Why or why not?
7. Define prima facie rights. Are all prima facie rights violations morally wrong? Provide examples to illustrate your answer. Can you think of a rule for how to determine if something is a prima facie rights violation? What rule do you think Huemer is employing when he argues that refusing immigration is a prima facie rights violation?
8. Huemer argues that it is possible that the United States might be justified in denying social services to immigrants or imposing special taxes on them, but it would not be justified in denying them entry to the territory. Do you agree that such differential treatment of immigrants and other citizens could be morally justified? Why or why not?
9. Miller considers three objections to his claim that there is no unlimited right to migration between states. Explain the objection that you think is the strongest. Do you think Miller satisfactorily responds to this objection? Why or why not?
10. Explain Miller’s response to the question of what obligations states have toward refugees. How might someone who thinks states have stronger obligations toward refugees than Miller claims challenge his position? What do you think states owe to refugees? Explain and defend your answer.