Here's a question: Which ethics make it into Peter Singer's ethics?

Cause I think I notice a trend.

I have been penpaling, you might say, with the very famous Oxford-Princeton ethicist, Peter Singer.

It started well: I had questions; he had replies.

Then it got weird: I had questions, he had expansive definitions and rhetorical questions.

And finally, it got acrimonious: At one point, I called him a dumbass.

But here’s the thing!:

There are certain relevant subjects Peter Singer seems unwilling to talk about on the record. That’s not a good look for “the world’s most influential philosopher,” or the top living ethics writer, is it?

Just before our penpalship ended, Singer asked me to take his prior comments off the record:

“I'd like all our correspondence to be off the record, again, at least at this stage, including my earlier email to you. I realize that I should have said this before writing that email, and that because I slipped up in not doing so, you can refuse to grant me that. But since I don't know you at all, it would be good to establish some trust, if you are interested in doing that.”

Trust? What a misplaced idea, here. Of course, I told him no. And that I have several more sources to speak to.

Anyway, one day last week, my husband Drew pointed out that Peter’s email signature suggested I ask his A.I. anything I want.

So I did.

What do YOU notice about the ethics of Peter Singer?

More to come.