title: How to argue against active euthanasia.
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Philosophy, CB 232, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-2323, USA.
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Boonin
mesh_terms: 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