Argumentative Essay: Onora O’Neill and Peter Singer

Onora O’Neill and Peter Singer both argue that affluent people and countries have substantial obligations to those people who are faring worst, such as in situations of famine. However, O’Neill and Singer make very different arguments, and as a result they disagree about the nature of our obligations: to allow and sustain people’s autonomy (O’Neill), or to reduce suffering as much as we can (Singer).

The 2 sources needed for the assignment are:

O’Neill, O. (2008). “Rights, obligations and world hunger.” In T. Pogge & K. Horton (Eds.) Global ethics: Seminal essays. St. Paul, MN: Paragon House, pp. 139–155.


Singer, P. (1972). “Famine, affluence, and morality.” Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1(3), 229–243.

Outline of the essay required:

#1: Introduction

#2: Explain O’neill essay

#3: Explain Singer essay

#4:Provide an argument to defend one of the two positions over the other.

#5: Conclusion