Download File - Kamran ePortfolio

Kamran Shariatmadari
Lifeboat Ethics: the Case against Helping the
Poor
Garrett Hardin published the article Lifeboat Ethics: the Case against Helping the
Poor in Psychology Today in September of 1974. Dr. Hardin was a trained ecologist and
micro-biologist who published more than 350 articles and 27 books. He is best known for
his essay, The Tragedy of the Commons, written in 1968, which is now widely accepted
as a fundamental contribution to ecology, population theory, economics and political
science. He graduated from Stanford University with a Ph.D. in microbiology and earned
a B.S. in Zoology at the University of Chicago. He often wrote about bioethics and highly
controversial issues in a “tough love” sort of way. His main focus of this essay was to
convince an audience of middle to upper class people to be against the idea of supporting
the poor. Also, the administration of relief to the poor is not the responsibility of the rich.
At the time, population was growing more rapidly then ever because of the Baby Boomer
era and families beginning to settle down and have more children. The ideas of foreign
aid and immigration were alive with the multiple wars happening around the world,
leaving destruction in their wake.
Hardin describes environmentalists that compare the earth to a spaceship to stop
wasting its resources. But he says this idea of the earth as a spaceship is confused with
the earth being a lifeboat. A lifeboat that can take no more than 50 people cannot stay
afloat if it attempts to pick up the hundreds of swimmers that seek aid. The lifeboat
represents the wealthy nations and the swimmers as the poor nations. Hardin uses this
metaphor to guide his thoughts throughout the article; alerting that the world has limited
resources and not everyone can be aboard if the majority is to survive. Hardin continually
dispels the arguments of the critics to leave the audience with a feeling of life or death.
Readers have an opportunity to rethink how strongly they feel about assisting the poor
when it directly determines their own well-being. Hardin uses an effective method of
turning our selfless emotion of naturally wanting to aid those in need, into a selfish yet
logical survival instinct to save only what can be sustained. His emotionless approach
leaves the audience assuming he is another wealthy jerk, yet he is still credible because
they appreciate his logic, which is lacking the overall definition of rich and poor.
Additionally, Hardin uses a distinct method of countering elaborate arguments
with powerful forthright statements. The common “Christian ideal of ‘being our brother’s
keeper’” is quickly rebutted with the harsh reality that “the needs of all in the water are
the same, and since they can all be seen as "our brothers," we could take them all into our
boat, making a total of 150 in a boat designed for 60. The boat swamps, everyone
drowns. Complete justice, complete catastrophe” (Hardin Par. 6). He states the inevitable
with such short and direct sentences to answer the monumental question whether the
wealthy should have to take care of the poor, or let things happen the way Darwin had it
intended, survival of the fittest. The immediate response of compassion for the needy is
put at ease with truth of his arguments, making this an effective piece of work, creating a
clear picture that saving the poor will only cause economic destruction for the countries
providing assistance.
Hardin successfully reaches his audience with his thoughts in a harsh but realistic
way. He provides sound reasoning for every argument the audience will bring about. By
tackling critics’ thoughts in such a fluid motion of concise statements, it leaves the
audience in a frustrating pickle of thought, whether it is worth the well-being of the earth
to save more than the capacity of the “lifeboat” we are in, or to let natural instincts of
optimistic compassion sink the world.