Global Poverty: Philosophical Questions

These lectures are about the moral obligations that well-off people have toward poor people living in other countries. Poverty kills about one-third of humankind. Many philosophers argue that the average person in a rich country has a moral obligation to do something about this. These lectures introduce those arguments, as well as the objections that others have raised against them. They show how contemporary moral philosophy deals with what many regard as the most important moral problem facing the world today.

Last refreshed: May 21st, 2026 at 1:06 PM

Follow on

Apple Podcasts

Spotify

RSS

Podcasts are better in Metacast mobile app

Don't just listen to podcasts. Learn from them with transcripts, summaries, and chapters for every episode. Skim, search, and bookmark insights. Learn more

Episodes

4. Arguments from Harm

This episode delves into Thomas Pogge's "arguments from harm," asserting that well-off countries and their citizens harm the global poor by actively cooperating in an unjust institutional order. It details three key mechanisms: international resource and borrowing privileges, protectionist trade barriers, and intellectual property laws on pharmaceuticals. The discussion also covers Pogge's proposed reforms, including a Global Resources Dividend and a Health Impact Fund, alongside common objections to his view and their rebuttals.

Aug 08, 2011•53 min

3. Arguments from Distributive Justice

James Grant, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Oxford, discusses the debate over whether distributive justice requires that well-off people do something about poverty in other countries. 'Cosmopolitan' philosophers, such as Charles Beitz and Simon Caney, argue that it does. Anti-cosmopolitans, such as John Rawls and Thomas Nagel, deny this.

Aug 08, 2011•51 min

2. Arguments from Beneficence, Part 2

The lecture delves into philosophical critiques of extremely demanding principles of beneficence, particularly as advanced by Peter Singer, which suggest individuals have extensive duties to the global poor. It covers J.L. Mackie's functionalist objection, Bernard Williams' concerns about personal projects, and Samuel Scheffler's proposal for balancing impartial and partial moral standpoints. The discussion also features Liam Murphy's argument concerning the unfairness of such demands in non-ideal scenarios and Garrett Cullity's critique based on the value of a non-altruistically focused life, concluding with a brief overview of alternative, less stringent principles.

Aug 08, 2011•52 min

1. Arguments from Beneficence, Part 1

James Grant delves into the philosophical questions surrounding global poverty, outlining different types of arguments for duties owed by the affluent. The core of this lecture focuses on Peter Singer's argument from beneficence, which asserts that failing to prevent suffering without comparable sacrifice is morally wrong. Grant thoroughly explains Singer's premises, including the controversial implication that luxury spending is as wrong as ignoring a drowning child, and then presents various criticisms of Singer's position.

Aug 08, 2011•52 min

For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android