What will happen if Singer’s drowning child is replaced by an adult? Will it be as effective in pinning moral responsibility on the individual witnessing the scene?
We hope our project would be engaging and accessible to the general public, even those without a background in philosophy.
Group members and contributions:

W5G1

• Charmaine – Script for section 1 – Drowning child argument
• Lionel – Script for section 2 – Physical manifestation. What if it wasn’t children, but another entity?
• Megan – Script for section 3 – If it is a person (adult) drowning, would we be more obligated to save it?
• Michelle – Script for section 4 – Point to the situation of why we are more willing to save the child.
• All – Did the actual video and editing together

References

• Singer, P. (1972). Famine, Affluence, and Morality. Princeton University Press. Retrieved January 10, 2012.
• Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2012, December). Moral Foundations Theory: The Pragmatic Validity of Moral Pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 47, 12. Retrieved November 3, 2016.
• Ideas relating to Singer’s drowning child argument was also drawn from Associate Professor, Loy Hui Chieh’s week 5 lecture on Rich and Poor and tutorial classes.