3) Unger examines nine (9) possible differences between the conduct in the Sedan case and that on the Envelope case. Pick five (5) and explain how he shows that none of them can legitimize judging negatively only Sedan’s behavior and not the Envelope’s.
Peter Unger’s Living High and Letting Die, Unger aims to support Peter Singers claim that “those of us who live in rich countries are morally obligated to give substantial sums of money to aid agencies” (Unger, 325). He points out that people view opportunities to help those in grave danger as obligatory yet cases involving appeals for funds are not. Different reactions are spawned by moral differences between the cases. Unger argues that, “such reactions often reflect morally irrelevant factors that cloud our judgment and lead us to underestimate the moral importance of the needs of those far away from us” (Unger325). He presents two cases, The Envelope and The Vintage Sedan, in order to show how these morally irrelevant factors do not change our moral obligation to give to aid agencies.
Then Envelope case depicts receiving a piece of mail from UNICEF asking for a $100 donation in order to save the lives of 30 children. Instead of funds being sent, the envelope is thrown away and 30 more children die that would have if money had been sent. The Vintage Sedan case involves a person owning a vintage sedan that is the only luxury in life he or she has. While driving one day, the owner of the sedan hears screams for help from a man who is wounded and covered in blood. He explains that he was trespassing and injured his leg, which he has tied his shirt around to stop the bleeding. He is great danger of losing his leg and asks the sedan owner to take him to the nearest hospital. The sedan owner knows that the blood from this man’s injuries will ruin the upholstery in the back seat so the sedan owner leaves the man on the side of the road and he consequently loses his leg. Most people would agree that the reaction to the envelope from UNICEF was very acceptable while the behavior in the Vintage Sedan case was morally wrong. Unger, however, argues that there is no moral difference between the two cases and that the reactions in both cases were morally wrong.
To illustrate his argument, Unger explores nine potential differences between the cases and explains why these differences are morally irrelevant. Five of these differences are as follows:
Physical Proximity
One of the most easily noted differences between the cases is the difference in physical distance. The closer someone in need is, the heavier the moral obligation is to help him or her. In the Vintage Sedan, the wounded man was only a few feet away while in The Envelope the children were thousands of miles away. Unger argues that, “the strength of a moral force doesn’t diminish with distance” (Unger 343). He gives two more cases, related to The Envelope and The Vintage Sedan, to further illustrate this. The “Envelopey” case is called The Bungalow Compound (Unger 344). In the case, 12 different parties in a poor country, namely Haiti, pay for a vacation bungalow. While staying there, one of the parties receives a letter in the mail from UNICEF asking for money to help save the lives of children in the town nearest to the bungalow. Quite a few needy kids happen to live just blocks from the bungalow and the $100 sent would save their lives. However, the envelope is thrown away and the nearby children soon die. Similar to The Envelope, the behavior seen in The Bungalow Compound is widely deemed appropriate. The “Sedanish” case is called The CB Radio. Like the Vintage Sedan, the owner of the car hears cries for help but this time it is over a CB radio. The sedan owner is only 10 miles away from the stranded man. However, remember how expensive the upholstery in the back of the car would be to replace, the sedan driver continues in the opposite direction and the stranded man loses his leg. The behavior in this case would very much been seen as morally wrong. Unger points out that in the Bungalow Compound case, the physical distance was much less than that in the CB Radio case. This contradicts earlier claims that the closer the distance, the more morally obligated one is to help. Thus, Unger dismisses this difference.
Social Proximity
A second difference, and closely related to the previous one, is social proximity. In The Envelope, the children were socially far away from the donor but the trespasser with the wounded leg in the Vintage Sedan was socially close. Unger offers a new case, The Long Drive to show that this should make no difference. The sedan driver is taking a long trip though South America and stops at a cross road in Bolivia. There the driver meets a Bolivian student who explains in Spanish that he needs a hospital for his leg. Again, thinking of the upholstery, the sedan owner drives away and the student loses his leg. This behavior would be seen as extremely morally wrong. However, the student was not a close relative to the sedan owner. Since social proximity is assumed to be important, this should make a difference in the way the sedan owner reacted. However, it does not. Thus, Unger dismisses Social Proximity.
Informational Directness
The third difference deals with “how the agent learns of the great need he can help meet” (Unger 345). In the Vintage Sedan, the car owner learns of the wounded man’s need directly. However, in The Envelope, information is received indirectly by reading a second hand source. Unger argues that in receiving the envelope from UNICEF, there is no doubt where the money is being sent and to what end, just as there is no question where help is needed and going in the Vintage Sedan. How information is received in morally insignificant.
Experiential Impact
This difference is best described by looking at the two original cases. In the Vintage Sedan, the needs of the wounded man were brought into the car owner’s own experience. However, the need expressed in The Envelope was not experienced at all. The strong reaction to the CB Radio case shows that this makes no difference. The stranded man’s need did not come into the car owner’s own experience yet his behavior was still seen as morally wrong.
Unique Potential Saviors and Multiple Potential Saviors
The fifth difference is that of there being one possible savior or multiple possible saviors. In The Envelope, hundreds of letters were sent out so there were many potential donors and the moral obligation was shared. However, in the Vintage Sedan there was only one possible savior. Thus, the behavior of the car owner was seen as wrong while the behavior in The Envelope was seen as okay. To argue against this, Unger proposes another example called The Wealthy Drivers. In this case there are three other drivers in the area with CB radios and everyone hears the pleas from the wounded trespasser. All the other drivers are five miles away while the sedan driver is 10 miles away. Also, the other drivers are much wealthier than the sedan driver. However, none of the other drivers want to help and neither does the sedan owner. Thus, the trespasser loses his leg. Although there were multiple potential saviors, the behavior of all of them is seen as wrong. Because of this, Unger argues that the number of potential saviors is morally irrelevant.
The Patio 