Singer's utilitarian arguments are logical only in the sense that logic is the work of machines or computers. However, humans have "fuzzy logic", or emotions, and for this reason such "logical" arguments have little to do with reality. And if philosophy is not built on human reality, it is either an absurd discussion or a prelude to a totalitarian nightmare, of which our century has had several.

Reality shows that mothers love their children, that people care for their parents. Oh, not all (there are a few that do not: moralists call them evil and psychiatrists call them sociopaths). Utilitarians ask us to ignore these innate and softer emotions which are almost universal in cultures, in favor of their hard and cruel logic. But it doesn't work: the African proverb is: even a small snake has a tooth. The retarded child he thinks is no better than a cat under his logical system has a mother, and relatives who might get mad if we use this philosophy to construct our laws. People only put up with so much, and, as the African proverb says, even a small snake has a tooth.

That's why so many simple people shudder in horror at Singer's name and philosophy: because he ignores and destroys anything soft or weak or not useful, ignoring that there are other virtues needed to run a successful society beside usefulness or utility.

Pear Buck, the mother of a retarded daughter, put it this way:

"It can be summed up perhaps, by saying that in this world, when cruelty prevails in so many aspects of life, I would add the choice to kill rather than to let live. A retarded child, a handicapped human being, brings its own gift to life, even to the life of normal human being. That gift is comprehended in the lessons of patience, understanding and mercy, lessons which we all need to receive and to practice with one another, whatever we are."

-- Nancy Reyes, M.D. Mescalero Hospital Mescalero N.M. (posted 3/14, 12:30 p.m., E.S.T.)

previous response

next response

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name: Your title & institution: Your phone: Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments

STEP 3: Submit!

Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored.

The Chronicle maintains Colloquy as an open forum where readers can comment on issues. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. We correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the submissions.

Please read our privacy policy or our Colloquy help page if you have questions.

Check this box only if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.