Singer's own view is that even if others besides me know about a very bad thing and can help prevent it from happening without sacrificing anything morally significant, what I should do to help in the situation is not affected merely by the existence and numbers of such others.In the following passage he considers and then criticizes an opposing view that if there are such other people (who both know about the suffering as well as can help without sacrificing anything morally significant), then my responsibility is less than it would be without these others, and the more such people there are the lesser I am morally required to do. He presents an argument for this opposing view before evaluating it:"The [opposing] view that numbers do make a difference can be made plausible if stated in this way: if everyone in circumstances like mine gave £5 to the Bengal Relief Fund, there would be enough to provide food, shelter, and medical care for the refugees; there is no reason why I should give more than anyone else in the same circumstances as I am; therefore I have no obligation to give more than £5. Each premise in this argument is true, and the argument looks sound. It may convince us, unless we notice that it is based on a hypothetical premise, although the conclusion is not stated hypothetically. The argument would be sound if the conclusion were: if everyone in circumstances like mine were to give £5, I would have no obligation to give more than £5."
Present the argument for the opposing view, with two premises and a conclusion, in standard form.