consider morals by agreement as a subset of ethics, and ethics a subset of value theory. relative to this, is aid to distressed countries a moral obligation. take into account singer’s view on foreign aid
ChatGPT said:
You’re approaching a complex philosophical question with good structure—placing morals by agreement (a contractualist or social-contract approach to ethics) within ethics, and ethics within value theory. From this lens, we can now ask:
Is aid to distressed countries a moral obligation, especially in light of Peter Singer’s view on foreign aid?
Let’s unpack this in stages, aligning with your framework.
1. Singer’s View on Foreign Aid
Peter Singer, particularly in his essay “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, makes a strong utilitarian case for a moral obligation to aid those in severe distress globally. His central claim:
If we can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought to do it.
This leads to a very demanding conclusion:
- Those in affluent countries are morally obligated to give up luxuries to aid others (e.g., people suffering from famine or disease in poor countries).
- Not doing so is, by his reasoning, morally equivalent to allowing preventable harm.
2. Morals by Agreement Perspective
“Morals by agreement” (à la David Gauthier and other contractarian thinkers) suggests:
- Morality emerges from mutual advantage—rules that rational individuals would agree to under fair conditions.
- Moral obligations are negotiated based on rational self-interest and reciprocity.
From this view:
- There is no innate moral duty to assist strangers unless a shared agreement or benefit exists.
- International aid might only be a moral obligation if:
- There’s reciprocity (e.g. trade, stability, global cooperation),
- Or if rational agents would agree to it under some hypothetical social contract covering global relations.
Singer’s view pushes beyond this. He argues for unilateral duty based on capacity to help, not reciprocity or agreement.
3. Within Ethics and Value Theory
Within ethics (as part of value theory), you find:
- Consequentialist theories (like Singer’s utilitarianism) emphasize outcomes—maximizing well-being.
- Deontological theories focus on duties or rights.
- Contractualist theories (like morals by agreement) focus on justified principles that no one could reasonably reject.
From the broader ethical standpoint:
- There is substantial normative support for the idea that we should aid distressed countries, especially if:
- The suffering is grave,
- The cost to the benefactor is relatively low,
- And the aid is effective.
But the basis for obligation differs:
- Singer: It’s a direct moral duty, grounded in impartial concern for well-being.
- Morals by Agreement: It’s conditional—we are morally bound only if such aid aligns with principles of mutual benefit or hypothetical agreement.
4. Conclusion
Is aid to distressed countries a moral obligation?
- According to Singer (utilitarianism): Yes, unequivocally. It is a strong moral duty.
- According to morals by agreement: Not inherently, unless it can be justified through mutual advantage or rational agreement.
- In broader ethics: Many frameworks do support the idea of moral obligation—though they differ in why and how far that duty extends.
So, relative to your framework, the moral obligation to aid distressed countries exists strongly in Singer’s ethics, conditionally in morals by agreement, and is a significant question within value theory, reflecting deep questions about what we owe others and why.
Would you like to explore how Rawlsian justice or cosmopolitan theories address this, too?