Book Reviews
The Life You Can Save
Bioethicist Peter Singer challenges all of us to rethink our ideas about “a good life.”
By Elizabeth A. Brown | March 11, 2009 edition
Be warned: Reading this book may be dangerous to your definitions of morality, charity, and how to be good. This is why you must read it.
Let’s start with a hypothetical: You’re walking past a shallow pond, where a child is drowning with no one around to help. Would you stop and save the child? Is it wrong not to help the child because you don’t want to ruin your new shoes? Is a life worth more than shoes?
Hold that thought, and look for a moment at that $1.25 bottle of water or soda sitting on your desk, not far from an abundant source of safe tap water. A luxury, no? Contrast that to the fact that 1.4 billion of the world’s poorest people live on that same amount – $1.25 – each day, failing miserably to meet all their human needs for food, shelter, medical care, education, etc.
(Lest you insist that it’s cheaper to live in poor countries, the World Bank has already adjusted that into what it would feel like to live in the US on $1.25 a day.) Imagine doubling a person’s income by forgoing that bottle of water!
Still willing to spend money on a luxury (bottled water) when you could instead save – or at least greatly improve – a real person’s life? And if you choose not to save that life, can you believe you’re truly living a moral life?
Philosopher and author Peter Singer poses these questions in his latest book The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty. A professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, Singer has written dozens of other books, including his best-known, “Animal Liberation,” which helped launch the animal rights movement.
This logically argued, thoroughly convincing book should jump-start a world-charity movement, as it requires each of us to define what it means to live ethically and then challenges us to literally put our money where our mouth is. “At a minimum, I hope the book will persuade you there is something deeply askew with our widely accepted views about what it is to live a good life,” he writes.
Singer has studied charitable giving for 30 years, so he knows the resistance:
•Will my cash undercut vital political change?
•How do I find an efficient, honest charity?
•Why should I give if my wealthy neighbors don’t?
•What about the billions in aid that the West has already given?
•Shouldn’t we take care of our own country’s poor, before helping others?
He answers these and other objections, and steers readers toward charities matching their interests. For example, if you want your money to go toward educating girls, you can check the author’s website www.LifeYouCanSave.com, follow links, and find an effective charity that does that. (Singer favors Oxfam America, to which he will donate the proceeds from this book’s sales.)
“The Life You Can Save” includes brief profiles of people who already give money and time doctoring, building, and teaching in impoverished areas. One such group, The 50% League, is a collection of wealthy and working-class folks who give half their income to the poor. Sharing these stories is beneficial, says Singer, because the more we hear about others giving, the more likely we are to give as well.
Less heartening, however, are the statistics on how the superwealthy spend their billions. While Singer praises Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, he decries the “moral depravity” of Oracle founder Larry Ellison, who not only lags in charitable giving, but embraces a lifestyle that wreaks disproportionate havoc on our environment. In a single hour, Ellison’s $200 million yacht burns as much diesel fuel as does a Volkswagen Jetta in seven years and emits as much nitrogen oxide in that hour as the car emits over 20 years.
Writes Singer: “It’s time we stopped thinking of these ways of spending money as silly and harmless displays of vanity…. We need an ethical culture that takes account of the consequences of what each of us does for the world … and that judges accordingly.”
Singer concludes with suggested annual percentages for giving: 5 percent of the first $148,000 (gross income), 10 percent of the next $235,000, and up. I’m left wondering if those of us earning less than $100,000 can make a difference donating the measly 1 percent of our income he suggests.
Yet if every American gave at these levels, Singer predicts the charity coffers would swell to $510 billion, even to $1.5 trillion if other nations followed – far exceeding the amount the United Nations needs to reach current targets.
A lofty goal, requiring each of us; so count me in.
Elizabeth A. Brown is a freelance writer living near Hillsborough, N.C
( More stories )
Comments
3. Wayne Harrison | 03.15.09
Isn’t democracy and free speech wonderful.
We can get great posts by Elizabeth Brown and Diane Aurit as above and then an unsolicitied one-liner totally out of left field from skippy.
For those that would like to know more about Peter Singer’s latest book, his upcoming talks and how you can download a free chapter from his book, go to http://thelifeyoucansave.com/
4. Muhammad Daheem | 03.16.09
Trillions of dollars can be saved for the poor simply by introducing an interest free banking system all over the world. The economy based on interest free system can bring relief for the lower and middle classes. Shylock, in the play ‘The Merchant of Venice’, is accused by the noble characters for lending money to the poor upon advantage. Money- making seems to be his only interest in life. Many developed countries are playing the role of Shylock for the underdeveloped countries. Interest based economy makes the rich countries more rich and the poor countries more poor. Once a country is in the clutches of the World Bank or International Monetary Fund organization it is hardly possible for it to survive. It is not simply the tragic story of the nations but the individual characters too suffer for the same reason. It is because of the interest based loans. Circulation of the money among the common masses is the solution of the poverty all over the world. It is the moral obligation of a Welfare State to help the needy. Economy plays an important role in the upbringing of downtrodden people. Look at the luxurious lifestyle of kings and queens, lords and ladies and a number of rich people who may have got the money through ‘justified legal sources’, not acceptable for the common man. It’s time to change the system. The poor people are just worried about the basic needs and necessities. These include food, shelter, medical care and education as mentioned by Elizabeth A. Brown. ‘The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty’ raises a few questions. The first and foremost question is the legitimacy of the money sources that may be legal in the capitalistic world but may not be justified ethically. Why are the poor becoming more poor? Why are the rich growing more rich? How can this all be justified? Why not extra taxes be levied by the governments on various companies’ profits for the sake of the poor? The governments should take positive steps to reduce the financial differences between the rich and the poor. The aim of each individual should be the betterment of the masses.
5. ccyl | 03.17.09
I agree that as members of an affluent society, we can definitely give a great deal more. I’d like to go a step further and say that there are also things we can be doing to have a huge positive effect on the world’s poorest people that cost nothing at all…like advocacy. For example, we can all contact our members of Congress to tell them we want the US foreign aid system reformed.
U.S. global development policies and programs are scattered across 12 departments, 25 agencies and nearly 60 government offices with different – and sometimes conflicting – priorities. Our half-century old Foreign Assistance act should be reformed with a clear focus on poverty elimination. This isn’t even asking for more money (which we could easily be providing using Singer’s rationale. Streamlining our process and aligning our priorities will ensure the people who need the most help get the most effective help we can give.
Just to be clear, I want to mention that I mean this as “in addition to” personal giving not “instead of”. Don’t want to let us off the hook that easily!!
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.





1. Diane Aurit | 03.13.09
I heard Peter Singer interviewed about this book yesterday on NPR. This is now on my list of must reads. I am working with an organization: http://www.MothersFightingForOthers.com to help orphan girls in Kenya. I get so many comments just like Peter addressed as to why we don’t focus on poverty in the US. If anyone reads this book they will understand!