Surname 1

Student’s Name

Professor’s Name

Course

Date

Demand Avoidance

In his book, Living High and Letting Die, Unger explains the importance of saving a person’s

life over a luxury item by giving an imaginary example of Bob. Approaching his retirement,

Bob invests all his money in an uninsured Bugatti, which he hopes to benefit from in the

future following the rising markets. One day, as Bob is out for a drive, he parks his Bugatti

near a railway line and goes for a walk. Unexpectedly, Bob spots a distant child playing on

the railroad and is about to be killed by a runaway track. However, he has two options, to

save the child by throwing a switch or save his Bugatti, which is about to be run over by the

train. Thinking of his truck and future financial benefits, Bob fails to throw the switch,

leaving the child killed by the train and saving his Bugatti. When trapped in the dilemma of

saving a person and a luxury item like Bob, people should choose the most important and

moral decision of saving a life.

Singer condemns Bob’s act because he had an opportunity of saving the child, but he

did not. According to Singer, Bob’s act is immoral, and many people could have also

condemned him for choosing a car over a life. Bob’s situation corresponds to many peoples’

actions of failing to donate luxuries to UNICEF or Oxfam American to save starving

children. People do not adhere to their moral obligations of saving lives but living like Bob

and choosing material things more important. Singer urges people to act morally and even

use their credit cards to donate to organizations. He also provides toll-free numbers that can

be used to reach the organizations when offering donations.

 Surname 2

I agree with Singer’s idea of saving the child over a Bugatti because human life is

valuable. Besides, it is possible to replace a luxury item like a car, but a person’s life is

irreplaceable. If I were Bob and spot a distant child about to be run over by a train, I would

absolutely save the boy by throwing the switch because I will not be able to reach him on

time. On the contrary, many people fail to draw the moral line and are attracted by luxury

items such as expensive cars than saving the boy. The difference with Anger’s case is the

Bob was the only savior for the boy, but he failed to act to his moral obligation. On the

converse, many people have the ability to forego spending on luxurious restaurants or buying

experience cars to donate money to UNICEF or other aid organizations and help starving

children, but they cannot. However, that is not enough excuse for a person to ignore another

person’s life to choose a deluxe item. This is wrong and morally impermissible. Saving a life

is not debatable because our moral intuitions should guide us into doing the right thing. Some

people do not have the same perception as to them saving a stranger is quite difficult.

Ironically, they could be judging Bob for not saving the boy or other people for failing to

sacrifice for the needy while in the real sense do not behave according to their words. It is

important to sacrifice for others who require our help. In times of dilemma, people should

always act morally and sacrifice for the sake of human safety to avoid wallowing in guilt.
 Surname 3

Works Cited

Singer, Peter. "The Singer solution to world poverty." The New York Times

Magazine 5.September (1999): 60-63.