Example Of Should The Rich Nations Help The Poor? Essay

Are the rich countries under any obligation on the basis of moral principles to help the poor nations? There are many deaths occurring in the underdeveloped world. The natural catastrophes have the greatest impacts in these regions leading to massive deaths. War and political instability are common occurrences. Refugees cluster in camps with little or no help coming forth from the wealthy nations and individuals. Peter Singer claims that there has been very little help. Therefore, he demands that the rich nations ought to increase the relief funds to these regions.
Whereas humans are social beings, pain is inherent and cannot be avoided. Only a reduction of pain can occur. Epicurus claims that people ought not to indulge themselves in sensual pleasures that as Singer claims characterize the wealthy nations that do not help the poor. In this case, Singer contends that it is immoral of the wealthy nations to not help the poor. The act not to offer assistance to the suffering does not seek to produce the greatest good and promote happiness for all humans and hence, such an action violates utilitarian principle. However, morals are attached to personal views as opposed to the whole nation.
As Aristotle asserted, one ought to have been brought up in a certain way in order to have certain moral principles. One having not been taught how to help, at least to a greater extent as singer expects; there would be little help forthcoming from the developed countries. A country whose majority of the citizens have grown up without necessarily learning the plight of others, they cannot understand how to help those far, leave alone those in their society. Charity organizations do good work in helping the refugee and stopping them from dying.
But who would sacrifice all the pleasures of life to help others gain some pleasure? Aristotle contended that avoiding pleasure is insensible. He also claimed that it would be wrong for one to overindulge and hence a balance between the excess and extreme deprivation is necessary. One cannot give a lot as Singer claims since one may fear that in the near future, one may be met by the predicaments as the refugees (suffering). It is imperative that giving more for charity has serious economic ramifications to the individuals that can instill fear to the giver. Whereas fear is inherent in humans, it should not act as a deterrent to doing well. In this respect, therefore, one ought to control the fear and give more to help stop the refugees from anger and death. In addition, Kantian ethics holds that act are good not because of the consequences, but because the actions are good themselves without qualification.
On the other hand, Epicurus would wonder why one would fear death. Epicurus viewed that death does not bring forth suffering. In such circumstances, only the foolish would fear death. Arguing from this perspective, then, one would wonder why should one help avert death from whatever cause? Although this claim is true, the souls experience a lot of pain from anger and slow death. Death in itself is not the fear, but it is the slow process full suffering that causes one to fear death. Every human being seeks to be free from pain and hence, have a soul that is not troubled. The troubled souls of the refugees can only be reduced by providing them the basic needs that would liberate them from anger and pain. The absence of pain makes them also have the pleasure that is good as long as it does not cause or lead to more pain.
The virtuous person is made to behave naturally in a certain way. One derives pleasure from behaving in virtuous ways. According to Aristotle, one ought to moderate between having excess and the extreme deficiency. When the rich nations have more than enough to feed themselves while others are dying of anger, such is immoral. It is on this basis that Singer demands that such nations seek to help stop the suffering of the refugees. The same case extends to the person who acts in such a manner that seeks to help reduce pain and suffering.
However, one would wish to questions the cause of suffering of the people in the refugees. The people by virtue of being any other humans ought to have faced their enemies in the battles and fought other than collect themselves in refugee camps. Aristotle would contend that doing so is lack of courage and confidence to face their problem. Justice entails mutual benefits. If a country like Central Africa Republic that engage in war that is self-destructive, even if the developed nations ought to help the suffering, there is an extent that defeats the moral essence of such help.
According to Utilitarianism, in as much as reducing the immediate suffering is good, would be to stop the war that leads to the people into refugee camps. That is the only sure way to restore peace and lead to happiness to all. Helping stop the war would need money and other resources that the rich nations do not have an alternative other than giving. The lack of intuition and wisdom among the refugees causes the suffering and hence anyone wishing to give any help, it should be geared towards the long term goals as opposed to the immediate pleasurable acts.