The questions Peter Singer asks his students make me think deeper about why I do certain things. The “what makes you obligated” question hits hard for me because why am I? I would most certainly save the drowning child to miss one of my class and get my clothes soaked, but why? What makes me obligated to go out of my way to save a child’s life who has no affect on my own life? One reason I could give is, what if that was one of my siblings drowning and a student walked past and did nothing. My sibling would die because the student was only self interested and didn’t take into consideration the full consequences of the bigger picture. I personally would have to think about what consequences would come out of my actions. Boo-hoo if my clothes get wet and I miss a class. I would have so much guilt and resentment towards myself if I didn’t do everything I could to help the child out. And to factor in that there are also multiple people walking around not doing anything would push me even more to save this child’s life. I believe just because no one else is doing anything doesn’t mean I have to do the same. If someone sees a person about to get ran over by a car, should I just stand around and watch too? I have to think about how my actions will affect not only myself, but others too. Utilitarianism is all about how your actions will affect the greater number. It doesn’t involve self interest and I admire that. Most people are all about doing what will benefit themselves rather than looking at the full picture. It’s a bit selfish if you ask me. After reading these two articles, I can honestly say that I will take the utilitarianism approach into consideration. I will think about how my actions will most positively benefit the greater number for the greater good.