#22 Peter Singer | Utilitarian and Buddhist Ethics
TRANSCRIPT SUMMARY
(This transcript summary was AI-generated and then edited by the podcast hosts for quality assurance)
#22 Peter Singer | Utilitarian and Buddhist Ethics
- a podcast dialogue with Michael Noah Weiss and Guro Hansen Helskog
INTRODUCTION
In this episode of the ResponsAbility Podcast, hosts Michael Noah Weiss and Guro Hansen Helskog welcome Peter Singer, one of the most influential moral philosophers of our time. Over a career spanning more than five decades, Singer has challenged how we think about ethical responsibility—from Animal Liberation to The Life You Can Save and, most recently, The Buddhist and the Ethicist, co-authored with the Taiwanese Buddhist scholar and activist Shih Chao-Hwei.
The conversation moves between theory and practice, philosophy and compassion, exploring how utilitarian ethics and Buddhist moral thought converge in their shared concern for suffering and moral responsibility. Together, the hosts and Singer reflect on how philosophy can be lived, taught, and practiced as a form of ResponsAbility—the cultivated ability to respond wisely to the moral challenges of our time.
LIVING ONE’S PHILOSOPHY
Guro begins by noting that Singer is one of the rare philosophers who seem to live his philosophy. Singer smiles at the description, admitting he does not always live up to his own demanding ideals, but insists that philosophy must guide how we live. Ethics, he says, is not an abstract discipline but “a way of examining your life,” echoing Socrates.
Peter Singer describes his commitment to effective altruism through The Life You Can Save, a charity he co-founded to help donors identify highly effective organizations combating extreme poverty. What began as a philosophical argument in a 1972 essay became a global initiative that has already directed over $120 million to effective aid organizations. For Singer, this embodies the link between moral reasoning and practical ResponsAbility: ethics only matter if it guides what we do.
UTILITARIANISM AND THE ETHICS OF WELL-BEING
When Michael raises the often-criticized label of “utilitarianism,” Singer responds with characteristic clarity: there is nothing shameful about striving to improve the well-being of all sentient beings. Utilitarianism, he explains, is rooted in a simple but radical idea—that suffering is bad and happiness good, regardless of who experiences them. To act ethically is to extend our concern beyond ourselves, to any being capable of pleasure or pain.
Singer acknowledges that utilitarianism can clash with religious or rule-based ethics, which may prioritize obedience or purity over well-being. But for him, the goal is always to minimize suffering and maximize flourishing. What distinguishes utilitarianism is not cold calculation but universal empathy, grounded in reason and impartiality.
ANIMAL LIBERATION AND MORAL CONSISTENCY
The conversation turns to Singer’s lifelong advocacy for animal welfare. He recounts how, as a graduate student at Oxford in 1970, he first became aware of the cruelty inherent in factory farming. Reading Ruth Harrison’s Animal Machines changed his perspective entirely. The realization that animals were being made to suffer for trivial human pleasures led him to become vegetarian and to write Animal Liberation (1975), a book that helped launch the modern animal rights movement.
Singer calls this ethical blindness “speciesism”—a prejudice that privileges human interests over equally sentient animal lives. He argues that moral consistency demands that we extend compassion to all beings capable of suffering. Continuing this project, his revised book Animal Liberation Now updates the evidence and ethical arguments for a 21st-century audience.
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN TRADITIONS: UTILITARIANISM AND BUDDHISM
Turning to The Buddhist and the Ethicist, Singer explains that the book grew out of his friendship and collaboration with Shih Chao-Hwei, a Buddhist scholar and activist known for her work on gender equality and animal welfare in Taiwan. The project began with their shared concern for animals, but expanded into a broad philosophical exchange about life, death, compassion, and moral responsibility. Singer chose the dialogue form, he says, because philosophy itself is dialogical. Like Plato’s dialogues, it allows differences to surface and mutual learning to unfold. The format also invites readers to form their own judgments as they follow the conversation. “You can see both positions evolve,” he explains—his utilitarianism grounded in consequence and Shih Chao-Hwei’s Buddhism grounded in compassion and intention.
Through their exchanges, Singer came to see that Buddhist ethics and utilitarianism, though emerging from different traditions, share the central aim of reducing suffering. Where Buddhism emphasizes the inner transformation of the agent, utilitarianism focuses on the outer effects of action. But in practice, both traditions call for a life of reflective compassion.
SPIRITUALITY WITHOUT GOD
Guro then asks whether his dialogue with a Buddhist thinker—given his own atheism—changed how he sees spirituality. Singer clarifies that Buddhism is not theistic in the Western sense: it does not require belief in a creator God. Many Buddhists, he notes, could fairly be called atheists too. What matters is practice—the cultivation of awareness and compassion.
He admits to being initially skeptical of monks who spend tens of thousands of hours in meditation in order to reach enlightenment. However later he came to understand the Bodhisattva ideal. Those living in line with this ideal postpone their own enlightenment and focus instead on helping others escape suffering. This “engaged Buddhism,” he says, resembles his own commitment to effective altruism. Shih Chao-Hwei even joked that he was himself a kind of secular Bodhisattva—someone who devotes his life to reducing suffering rather than seeking personal liberation.
WISDOM, MINDFULNESS, AND EDUCATION
Asked what Western philosophy and education can learn from Buddhist traditions, Singer highlights mindfulness and the capacity for mental self-regulation. In an age of distraction, he observes, “the brightest minds in the world are working out how to make people swipe more.” Buddhism teaches us to pause, observe our thoughts, and act with intention rather than habit.
For higher education, Singer sees this as crucial: universities should not only teach analysis and critique but also ethical attention— i.e. the ability to focus on what truly matters and to live accordingly. Reflection, he says, is a practical skill for living wisely.
RESPONSABILITY AND THE ROLE OF PHILOSOPHERS
Returning to the podcast’s central theme, Singer agrees that The Buddhist and the Ethicist is an exercise in ResponsAbility—in learning to respond wisely to moral complexity. The book’s two voices invite readers to hold multiple perspectives in tension and to find thoughtful, compassionate responses rather than rigid answers.
He also reflects on the broader role of philosophers and moral educators today: to illuminate global moral challenges such as poverty, animal exploitation, and climate change. Ethical reflection, he insists, must lead to practical engagement—reducing one’s carbon footprint, supporting effective charities, and advocating political change. Philosophy, in his view, has always been about “living better together.”
CLOSING REFLECTIONS
In the final part of the episode, Singer looks ahead to future encounters between philosophy and contemplative traditions. For him, the most promising conversations are those that combine rational clarity with compassionate awareness, free from dogma but open to wisdom.
As the dialogue closes, the hosts thank Peter Singer for sharing his reflections. The episode ends as it began—with a call to ResponsAbility: to think clearly, act compassionately, and respond wisely to the moral demands of reducing suffering in a complex world.
