Advertisement

Why Should We Help the Poor? Philosophy and Poverty

  • Christian Illies
Part of the International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine book series (LIME, volume 42)

Abstract

One might question whether we need ethics at all in the debate on global poverty, or whether the demand to help seems self-evident and the choice of particular actions should be left to specialists on developmental aid. In this chapter, it is argued that the answers are yes and no: No, because we can leave particular recommendations to experts once we know precisely what we should promote—but also yes, since we must know the exact end of our (demanded) action. Empirical poverty-research without specified ends is blind; it requires the prior identification and rational justification of particular ends. This, however, is the task of ethics because no empirical science can lead to normative insights. Since it is highly controversial whether philosophical reflection can provide such a justification, a transcendental argument is outlined: if there is something good, then it is good that the good is actively supported, and if a capability to do so is a necessary requirement for this support, then it is also good that human beings have this capability. Human freedom is the paramount capability to self-determine one’s life and actions. It is an essential condition for supporting the good. It follows that a certain kind of freedom (namely the one necessary for supporting the good; here called “moral freedom”) must be regarded as a necessary end for any morality. We are obliged to help others so that they can help.

The chapter ends with showing in which way the end “moral freedom” tells us why we should help the poor and can provide practical orientation for doing so.

Keywords

Poverty ethics justification of ends transcendental arguments freedom capabilities Sen 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ameriks, Karl. 1982. Kant’s Theory of Mind, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Black, Robert, Morris, Saul, & Jennifer Bryce. 2003. “Where and why are 10 million children dying every year?” The Lancet 361: 2226–2234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boylan, Michel. 2004. A Just Society. Lanham, MD and Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  4. Brownsword, Roger. 2007. “Human dignity: empowerment, constraint, and the conservation of moral community” unpublished manuscript. Available by contacting the editor, Michael Boylan.Google Scholar
  5. Gewirth, Alan. 1970. “Must one play the Moral Language Game?” American Philosophical Quarterly 7(2): 107–118.Google Scholar
  6. Hart, H.L.A 1967. “Are there any Natural Rights?” in A. Quinton (ed.), Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 53–66.Google Scholar
  7. Illies, Christian. 2003. The Grounds of Ethical Judgement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Kant, Immanuel. 1968 [1747–1790]. Kant’s Werke (Akademie Ausgabe). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  9. Nagel, Thomas. 1997. The Last Word. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Nussbaum, Martha. 1992. “Human functioning and social justice: in defense of Aristotelian essentialism”, Political Theory 20(2): 202–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sen, Amartya. 1985. “Well-being, agency and freedom: the Dewey Lectures 1984”, The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4): 169–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sen, Amartya. 1992. Inequality Reexamined. Oxford: Clarendon Press, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, and Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Sen, Amartya and Jean Drèze. 1995. India: Economic Development and Social Opportunity, Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. 106.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Illies
    • 1
  1. 1.Technical University DelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations