"The Singer Solution to World Poverty" was written by "Peter Singer." Finding the name of the author to this masterpiece would only be realized by carefully analyzing the heading. The narration has not introduced the author in any way. The literary piece makes the reader wondering what goes next. To start with, the location of the author and the publishing date are not available. The writer storms into the writing with a group of organ snatching Brazilians. The reader can imagine the author took this approach to allow some kind of gossip revolving around the emerging idea of assisting other people. Peter Singer largely highlights children having fun and playing on train tracks, parking along those tracks with vintage cars and starving children among other things.
The intents and purposes of this writing are indeed easy. The only rhetorical element applied is pathos Using pathos, Singer has been able to refer to any person going against his views as a bad human or even a monster. Therefore, a strong relationship can be realized with the audience. However, this is solely dependent on the nature of the reader and identifies emotionally with the subjects in the story. At the start of the story, a woman affords a new TV through the sale of a child in a Brazilian film. She becomes merciful and later rescues the baby. It is very difficult to believe the story, especially when a retired teacher succeeded to rescue the boy from an organ thief of Brazilian descent; "Suppose Dora had told her neighbor that it is a tough world, other people have nice new TV's too, and if selling the kid is the only way she can get one, well, he was only a street kid. She would then have become, in the eyes of the audience, a monster" (Singer 367). This technique was applied to create a particular ethos. The story of the retired teacher handling organ harvesters is a very reliable encounter in the writing. The narrative, however, needs to add more logos for the purpose of making it appeal to many other people, mainly because using one kind of emotional state would not be useful in the involvement of other people.
A lot of statistics have been used to discuss the situation in America. The United States was chosen from other nations because it would be an insult to the pride of any other country that is able to support its people. This would draw a lot of attention towards the author of the literary work of that kind. Focusing on a given nation would create a higher pathos for the person reading the story. It is unlikely that there would be a greater impact if the author included other nations. The citizens of the United States have been highlighted as consigning children to death even in their presence. A lot more pathos is applied making reference to the entire country as killers of children.
In this literary piece, the author wins the reader's attention in a manner he pleases. Many people outside the United States would actually love reading this masterpiece and vindicate it for the sole reason that they don't like America. Singer goes on to assert that the failure of America to donate is inclined to the view that one more child dies on the streets of the city of Brazil. It is not surprising that the author would use Brazilians as an example since this could get support from South America.
"Living High and Letting Die" by Peter Unger is an example of a book used in this writing. In this writing, Bob parks a priceless car on train tracks. Bob meets a child playing on the track while a train is approaching. The way he handles the situation is comparable to the situation in the United States. People are buying all sorts of things like clothing, TV sets and cars among others just as is the case of Bob along the train track. People may be killed, but material things and goods purchase is a priority. Looking at this much pathos and less of logos, the author's efficacy cannot be felt in offering a solution. This is mainly because he presents illogical ideas in assisting children that are already starving.
The basic element of replacing killed children on train tracks with Brazil children that are starving is an irrational idea. Bob fails to pull the switch. The child gets killed. This is comparable to the citizens in the United States. Even the individuals who did not make monetary donations or participate in charity events are facing the torment of being regarded as murderers. It goes without saying that Peter Singer does not want any approval from anybody, especially from America. This is because the stereotypes everybody in the event he or she does not help in any way.
This solution as prompted by Singer deals with the world that is more generous. The author puts forth compelling opinions in his work, which triggers the reader to question their ethics and morals. There is the rationalization of the largess' gift in an untraditional way, but in a manner that is very encouraging. The intention is to compel the subscribers to re-evaluate their ability to make contributions to the poor and vulnerable in the society.
The author writes encourages readers to make donations. He is very clear that almost every person is in a position to have an impact on other people's lives. He uses various situations that are very applicable. In result, his arguments connect well at an individual's level. As the reader and the author are connected at an individual level, the arguments by Singer present a solid ground. An amount of $200 may help a 2-year old sick child to grow up healthy up to 6-year-old (Singer 310). The audience is called to action and donate $200 and most do it instantly before proceeding with the reading (311). The figure presented by the author is very realistic, especially for many middle-class families, and actually evokes guilt if they continue reading and fail to donate.
The message delivered to the reader is in a stern and well-arranged manner. The pattern of creating this work was to make the reader understand the significance and impact of making donations to aid organizations abroad. Again, the intention is to persuade them to act. The belief in the author is that luxuries are wasteful. A luxury is a life refinement and not a need. The author does not advocate the purchase of a new car or a good house. In any case, $1,000, according to Singer (313), would help in saving five children.
Singer gets statistics from UNICEF to do calculations of the money that can be saved for a particular child amounting to $200; "again, the formula is simple: whatever money you're spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away" (Singer 372). The author believes that this contribution would have saved many lives. Following the text on how people can make monetary donations, the story appears to be a kind of an incompetent nature. The author says, "You have the information why aren't you donating? How can you judge yourself if you don't do it!" He wants to blame those who are reluctant to donate. He is referring to them as "Bobs." He believes these lives can be saved, but, at the same time, people of this kind can easily ignore the situation; "Bob's situation resembles that of people able but unwilling to donate to overseas aid" (Singer 369).
In conclusion, the writer shifts narration from the mocking crop of individuals to those who don't make donations. He moves on to make a comparison between Brazilian children who are starving to luxurious vintage cars, reiterating that these priceless automobiles can be equated to children. Peter provokes the reader by asking them if they were any different from Bob, even after using $200 on a dinner. The route taken by the writer in providing the "solution" would cause the redesign of the society in which we live. Buying new cars and clothes cannot be replaced by other things, however. Life goes on. The society will not come to a halt because something bad happened. Efforts will be made to alleviate such issues and move on at the same time.
The economics require putting money into the societal system and every other thing continued as usual. The failure to run errands here and there would bring the society into another stalemate that could be even worse than the case the author is trying to offer a solution to. There would be another depression. The author came to the conclusion that such hypothetical situations could be lousy. The ideas postulated by the author are quite absurd. While he is pursuing a noble goal, the approach is flawed. Giving 75% of a person's income is something unheard of. Suggesting that people should spend money on necessities and comparing money spent on luxuries to dead Brazilians is unfounded. It would have been better to have posed a challenge in writing by asking how much people would be ready to do in saving these children. This lacks in this story. Apparently, this writing pokes a lot of fun at Americans by denying them fun.