How to argue against active euthanasia.
Most arguments against active euthanasia, as do most arguments in applied ethics generally, take place within the framework of what can broadly be referred to as a modern, as opposed to an ancient, approach to moral theory. In this paper, I argue that this fact works to the disadvantage of opponents of active euthanasia, and that if there is a successful argument against active euthanasia, it will be of the latter sort. In Part I, I attempt to clarify the distinction between modern and ancient approaches with which I am concerned. In Part II, I attempt to show that any argument against active euthanasia that is of the first sort is bound to fail. In Part III, I propose an argument against active euthanasia of the second sort that I believe has a better chance for success. In Part IV, I consider some objections that can be raised against this argument and attempt to show how they can be overcome.
Boonin
D
D
Department of Philosophy, CB 232, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-2323, USA.
D026689:Ethical Analysis; D028663:Ethical Theory; D028601:Euthanasia, Active; D033101:Euthanasia, Active, Voluntary; D006801:Humans; D009014:Morals; D011640:Public Policy; D011788:Quality of Life; D012945:Social Values; D026712:Value of Life; D035761:Wedge Argument