Majorities must not kill minorities because it is wrong according to some higher principle rather than a

Majorities must not kill minorities because it is wrong according to some higher principle, rather than a mere calculus of interest or happiness.That principle is said by some philosophers to be the accumulations of wisdom and experience But Singer has no time for such arguments He is a hard rationalist and a revolutionary. In Preference Utilitarianism, why might it not be right to observe the preferences of a majority who wished to kill some minority – Jews, for example – in their midst? If the only moral authority is the sum total of interests and preferences, then there is nothing to stop those interests when they become brutalised; there is no court of appeal.For many, this argument indicates a decisive failing in the philosophy. But, at a deeper level, it indicates crucial problems with his thought For the German students have a point. Many young Germans identify his position – notably on euthanasia and infanticide – with that of the Nazis.This is, at one level, merely ironic.

Singer is of German-Jewish descent and three of his family died in concentration camps. In Germany and Austria, student demonstrations have prevented discussion of his ideas. The success of the animal liberation and environmental movements indicates more than just a convincing argument; it indicates the extent to which people discover personal fulfilment in attaching themselves to a big, external project.However, Singer’s message is not universally welcomed, even by young, left-inclined people. He is also a co-founder of the Great Ape Project which aims to obtain basic rights for chimpanzees, gorillas and orang- utans.The attractions of his thought, especially to the young, are obvious. You no longer have to sit at the feet of some guru, preacher or therapist to find a meaning for life You simply obey the dictates of reason. Always his insistence is that the purposelessness often felt by modern man is futile; there is so much to do and, now, on the basis of his ethics, so much reason to do it.Singer lives his philosophy, giving substantial portions of his income to foreign aid agencies, and he embraces environmentalism to the point where he is soon to stand as a Green Party candidate for the Senate of the state of Victoria.

He attacks the individualism of America – damning the futility of its obsession with self-help and psychoanalysis while its own cities are falling apart and Africans are starving. He feels that Western man has turned his ethical concerns inwards upon himself, and the private development of the personality has taken over from more urgent concerns. Abortion and euthanasia are permissible because the quality of being of a foetus or a terminally-ill old person is too low and not protected by any view that human life is sacred. Even after birth, handicapped babies might be killed if parents and doctors agree, and so on.In his later work, Singer extends the application of his ethics.