394

This is a parody of Peter Singer's Drowning Child thought experiment. He asks us to imagine someone who sees a child drowning, and doesn't help them because they can't be bothered. He claims there is no logical difference between a child drowning 10 yards away, and one starving on the other side of the world, so we are equally obligated to help both.

The argument giving by the bystanders that he is old and no longer working, and therefore a drain on society, is similar to his arguments that we should perhaps euthanize severely disabled people (via abortion), because the resources spent to care for them could be spent to help many more people, which causes more global good.

This is a parody of Peter Singer's Drowning Child thought experiment. He asks us to imagine someone who sees a child drowning, and doesn't help them because they can't be bothered. He claims there is no logical difference between a child drowning 10 yards away, and one starving on the other side of the world, so we are equally obligated to help both.

The argument giving by the bystanders that he is old and no longer working, and therefore a drain on society, is similar to his arguments that we should perhaps euthanize severely disabled people (via abortion), because the resources spent to care for them could be spent to help many more people, which causes more global good.