I puzzled over Doug's comment re: Peter Singer yesterday, and finally just asked him what he meant. Apparently some on this list are of the opinion that Peter Singer advocates a view that may be summed by saying, as Doug did, "some people just don't deserve to live any more".
This is such a patent absurdity that it really should be addressed. That's not remotely Singer's position. And it's hard to see how anyone, having first read charitably any of Singer's many essays or books, could attribute that position to him, absent malice or ideological motivation.
I suggest a reading of the first 100 pages or so of Singer's <cite>Practical Ethics</cite> if you're genuinely interested in understanding his views. I grant that he doesn't always write in a way that prevents misreading, but few philosophers do, and most of them write far less clearly than Singer.
For what it's worth, I'm neither a utilitarian, nor particularly keen on all of Singer, but I have taught philosophy, his work, and remain enough of an academic to think that what he actually *says* ought to matter when coming to some evaluation of his work.
I'd be happy to discuss details of Singer's work, either on this list when appropriate, (pretty often, since as a laborer in the fields of applied ethics, he's often making political or quasi-political claims), or in another forum when appropriate.
Best, Kendall Clark -- There's no such thing as magic, only science and jazz.