Think about what you need to know to understand this section. Your answer might include some of the following:
What does this section do to support Kuper’s argument/alternatives
What does this section do to support Kuper’s argument/alternatives
What major claims? – What does this mean?
What evidence? What does this evidence do?
What lists? – What do these lists do?
What words/ideas do you need to know?
4 comments:
In the section "No Royal Road to Poverty Relief", Kuper states four of Singer's supposedly power points. Right after he states Singer's ideas, Kuper says that they are all wrong. Kuper uses ideas and examples from Singer's papers and books to make singer sound like he doesn't know what he is talking about. Kuper refutes the idea that a $30,000 donation should be made and that the government always takes the side of the people. Throughout this section Kuper quotes Singer to make him look bad. At the end of the section he uses a quote by Singer to show that he doesn't know what he is doing.
In this section, Kuper emphasizes that there is no royal road to poverty relief. There are only ways that may help better the situation. He does this by criticizing Singers points that money will relieve poverty and that donating makes you a better person, that more good is done for us than harm from the government, and that there is little or no change without money. Kuper also emphasizes that there is a difference between "begging" the wealthy for money to donate (by informing them)and getting people to actually do something. He shows this through a quote by Singer which asserts that caring about the problem isnt enough, we must do something about it.
Kari Mitchell
-Comment
I believe Kuper meant that there is no one easy way to give aid to those impoverished and that one cannot guarantee that what they do will actually help them. This Royal Road refers to Singers proposal that one can just donate whatever excess money they have left over after their necessities and donate that to save lives. However, Kuper proves that there is no clear path like that and continues to prove why this is not the best method of aid.
Kuper immediately admits that Singer made 4 powerful points in this particular section that would help with donations. He says that his use of analogy is good for getting people to use their intuition. Second he says that Singer is clear what is the right thing to do. Then he says because of the singer article only good can come of it. And last there is no trade off between government and private action. Kuper follows that by countering those points. It is easy to follow because he lists them in the same order he previously used when listing 4 powerful points. He also uses first, second, and third when going on to the next idea. So it is easier to follow along
Post a Comment