In the above discussion, even Kant himself admits that the theory was mainly advanced out of fear of the consequences rather than the inherent good or bad that occur from the actions taken.
All the discussions that have been advanced to prove that in all ways, it is prudent to consider all the fact before making any decision.
The reason for the above is however deeper than simply doing what is rational as rationality in the case of the theory and other human factors in play may not be always in sync.
However, the major question is to whom the act is meant to justify morality to. The Kantian theory is flawed in some aspects.
Instead of following Kant on establishing facts, it is prudent to also consider emotions so that the suffering of those that are terminally Is euthanasia morally and philosophically justifiable essay and those in too much pain is alleviated.
While admitting that more has to be done on conditions such as cancer, it is not prudent to let people suffer simply because there is failure on the part of the human in advancing more on the medicine field.
The will of the person is the main driver towards this imperfect duty. It does not appear to be the best way for the person to continue living.
Many illnesses that were unknown to people in the era of Kant are now easily remedied by the advances made. What this theory tends to lean on is more towards the duty that human beings have rather that to the emotions that they harbor Beck In fact, it states that it is inherent in us to know and follow the maxims.
The theory did not forecast a scenario where the will of the person could take over. Here, the universalized maxim may not be followed by the human being meaning that they were not convinced the maxims way was the right one. Since the theory strongly advocates for the control of human life by a given maxim that decides when the particular life should end, the worsening condition of a sick person that adds to their pain and that of their loved ones does not appear to be the most prudent course of action.
I strongly believe that upholding the tenets of the Kantian theory so that the end result is a perfect duty for a terminally ill person in a lot of pain is not fair to that person and to all others who are involved. The fear he justified by saying was out of the lack of enough facts.
I agree that taking a human life is wrong in all ways, but the taking of life from a person whose end was death in the most cruel and painful way for the purpose of alleviating the inevitable pain for all involved where all other avenues have been exhausted is morally justifiable.
This is despite whether compassion was the motive or otherwise. Meaning that in most instances, the Kantian theory does not consider many actions as being morally good. The above consequence of the Kantian theory is interpreted as a perfect duty as the maxim has been upheld.
The use of euthanasia is morally justifiable and is therefore ethically acceptable since the use requires the opinion of medical practitioners. Applying the above example in the use of euthanasia, it is not morally good to assist a person in suicide simply out of compassion.
The position taken by this paper on the use of euthanasia is one that is opposed by the Kantian theory.
Many people consider this practice to be against all ethics. His reason for simplifying matters to such extremes was simply that the human being does not have the full facts on the dynamics of the world and as such is incapable of making decisions that are completely true.
Every case that requires euthanasia should be considered differently with its own tenets. This is no different for the medical practice. It is therefore moral for one to have the dignity that one deserves if they are considered to be suffering from the problem that they have and that there are no other options available for that person.
However, the use of euthanasia to end a human life is still not prudent in the eyes of the theory. Many people may argue that there is a higher power that guides human life and that only that power and that power alone is responsible for giving and ending human life.
In this argument, compassion is morally justifiable and is therefore ethically acceptable. This means that they opinion of these experts should be regarded in light of the advances in technology. The simplicity of this theory is that if for example a maxim stated that killing people who you dislike holds true, then the human race would not exist as ultimately, we will be forced to end the lives of all who we dislike and consequently, those who do not like us will kills us.
He completely disregarded whether an outcome was good or bad as long as the rational act was done and as long as the universalized maxim was adhered to.
Personally, I use it to include all forms of assisted suicide. In fact, human beings are more inclined towards the emotions that they feel. Conclusion Kant believed that the consequences of any action taken do not contribute to the moral strength of that particular act.
First, when a person conceives the maxim to hold true but it is no longer a means to an end, then the result may not be what is desired by the theory.Many view euthanasia as simply bringing relief by alleviating pain and suffering.
Euthanasia has been a long-standing ethical debate for decades in the United States. Active euthanasia is only legal in the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg. Assisted suicide is legal in Switzerland and in the United States in the states of Washington. Is Euthanasia Morally and Philosophically Justifiable?
Essay Words | 4 Pages. titled “The Death with Dignity Act” is morally and philosophically justifiable, the moral and philosophic viability of what is referred to as active voluntary euthanasia must first be evaluated.
More about Can Euthanasia Be Justified Morally? Essay. Can. There is need for the act of assisted suicide to be morally justifiable to make it ethical.
However, the major question is to whom the act is meant to justify morality to. Every case that requires euthanasia should be considered differently with its own tenets.
Throughout this essay we have had a look at the different types of euthanasia, and how different moral approaches accept them. We managed to conclude that morally there is no difference between passive and active euthanasia, and in some cases active euthanasia would even be advantageous.
Essay Words 4 Pages When considering whether the piece of legislation titled “The Death with Dignity Act” is morally and philosophically justifiable, the moral and philosophic viability of what is referred to as active voluntary euthanasia must first be evaluated. Is Euthanasia Morally and Philosophically Justifiable?
Essays - When considering whether the piece of legislation titled “The Death with Dignity Act” is morally and philosophically justifiable, the moral and philosophic viability of what is referred to as active voluntary euthanasia must first be evaluated.Download