If you wish, you may answer the questions from this part in groups. A maximum of three students in a group are allowed. All members of the group will receive the same grade. Write a thoughtful, concise essay on any one of the following topics. (If you missed one of the previous assignments, or if you want to improve your grade on one of them, please answer two questions.) Make sure that you address all the relevant points (I am asking you to address). Please, type and do not attach cover pages (we need to preserve the forest). Due, Monday in class.
Essay Question #1.
According to main argument about euthanasia: "If an act promotes the
best interests of everyone concerned and if it respects human
autonomy, and if it violates no one's rights, then that act is
morally permissible."
Explain this claim and its consequences for euthanasia. Be sure to explain why, in typical cases, euthanasia is both in the best interest of everyone involved and, in addition, it respects human autonomy, and also it does not violate any rights. Why do we need to establish all three points? (What kind of ethical theories are here at stake and may potentially be in conflict?)
Are all these points satisfied in cases of involuntary euthanasia?
Explain why or why not.
Essay Question #2
Using clear examples explain, first, the difference between killing
and allowing. Then, explain the difference between passive and active
euthanasia? Explain all four concepts using clear examples of
each.
Assume that passive euthanasia is sometimes morally permissible.
Discuss some reasons for thinking that active euthanasia may also be
sometimes morally permissible. (You do not have to agree with these
reasons, but you must explain them thoroughly.) Base your discussion
on an example which shows that there is no moral distinction between
killing and letting die. Be sure to explain your answer. (That is,
explain how your example shows that killing is not worse than letting
die. How does this support the claim that active euthanasia is not
worse than passive euthanasia?)
Essay Question #3
Using clear examples, explain the difference between ordinary and
extra-ordinary means of prolonging life? Explain two different ways
in which this distinction can be drawn. Base your explanations on
clear examples.
Which way of drawing the difference between ordinary and extraordinary means is typically assumed as morally relevant (e.g., by Paul Ramsey, many church-organizations, etc.) ? Explain your answer.
Given the morally relevant concept of extraordinary means, can we argue that active euthanasia is sometimes morally permissible? Explain why or why not. (You do not have to agree with these arguments, but you must explain them thoroughly.) Hint: Explain the connection that obtains between this concept of extraordinary means and the patient's well-being (quality of life).