A Reply to Some Standard Objections to Euthanasia

Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (1):43-47 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The purpose here is to cast doubt on some utilitarian non‐rights‐based arguments that are generally thought to be decisive objections to voluntary and non‐voluntary euthanasia. The aim is not to prove that euthanasia is morally vindicated (although I think rights‐based arguments can do this) but rather to contend that such arguments, far from being decisively anti‐euthanasia, can be made to point equally in the opposite direction.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,459

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Moral Permissibility of Euthanasia: A Case Discussion from Bangladesh.Azam Golam - 2007 - The Dhaka University Studies 63 (2):157-169.
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide.Michael Tooley - 2003 - In R. G. Frey & Christopher Heath Wellman (eds.), A Companion to Applied Ethics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 326–341.
The Empirical Slippery Slope from Voluntary to Non-Voluntary Euthanasia.Penney Lewis - 2007 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 35 (1):197-210.
How to argue against active euthanasia.David Boonin - 2000 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2):157–168.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-10

Downloads
31 (#736,320)

6 months
6 (#891,985)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Should it be legal to assist suicide?Harry Lesser - 2010 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16 (2):330-334.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references