Garrett Hardin and peter singer offer dramatically different views on the obligation of nations and individuals to intervene to alleviate world hunger and poverty. While each author offers numerous ar

Garrett Hardin and peter singer offer dramatically different views on the obligation of nations and individuals to intervene to alleviate world hunger and poverty. While each author offers numerous arguments to bolster their respective points of view, in general, which autho’s position to do you find most appealing? Explain why. Is there a middle ground that might be derived from insights provided in each author’s position?