Article Text
Abstract
An agent who takes his own life acts in violation of the moral law, according to Kant; suicide, and, by extension, assisted suicide are therefore wrong. By a similar argument, and with a few important exceptions, killing is wrong; implicitly, then, voluntary euthanasia is also wrong. Kant’s conclusions are uncompelling and his argument in these matters is undermined on considering other areas of his thought. Kant, in forbidding suicide and euthanasia, is conflating respect for persons and respect for people, and assuming that, in killing a person (either oneself or another), we are thereby undermining personhood. But an argument along these lines is faulty according to Kant’s own standards. There is no reason why Kantians have to accept that self-killing and euthanasia are contrary to the moral law. Even if some Kantians adhere to this doctrine, others can reject it.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- A case for justified non-voluntary active euthanasia: exploring the ethics of the Groningen Protocol
- Mr Marty’s muddle: a superficial and selective case for euthanasia in Europe
- Euthanasia, Ethics and Public Policy. An Argument Against Legislation
- Kant on euthanasia and the duty to die: clearing the air
- Assisted suicide and the killing of people? Maybe. Physician-assisted suicide and the killing of patients? No: the rejection of Shaw's new perspective on euthanasia
- A simple solution to the puzzles of end of life? Voluntary palliated starvation
- Euthanasia: above ground, below ground
- Ordering suicide: media reporting of family assisted suicide in Britain
- Medical Assistance in Dying at a paediatric hospital
- The body as unwarranted life support: a new perspective on euthanasia