Peter Singer: Reflection

Peter Singer writes about how Coetzee’s lecture is a group of characters giving their own opinions in a lecture, all with different viewpoints. With this point in mind, he goes on to explain what Coetzee is doing. Coetzee is using these different viewpoints to strengthen his topic, even though this book is “fiction”. He is wrestling with real ideas, real problems that people deal with and think about daily. By using his characters’ debates, he argues points and inserts criticisms which makes the reader think about the argument, not just glance over it. The best part about it is that in a debate setting, Coetzee is does not need to defend himself: he defends his fictional characters’ ideas. When discussing the “fullness of being is more important than whether it is bat-being or human-being” (Singer 90), Coetzee can explain that this is Costello’s ideas, not his own. Then he can use another character to take this down, or support it. Singer explains this to his daughter, Naomi, in a talk over breakfast. He himself is did something similar. You realize at the end of his reflection with his comment, “Me? When have I ever written fiction?” (Singer 91). By doing this, you realize the arguments Singer himself has been making are in fact something he is saying. He is not going to hide behind the veil of a character. Singer argued that humans have capacities that exceed that of nonhuman animals, and that is what makes a human more valuable, and has more to lose. Even though nonhuman animals deserve rights, the human life has more meaning to it. Humans think of the future, and Singer argues that humans have more meaning to their existence.

Kyle Remmert and Marco Iskandar