Preview

J Gay Williams The Wrongfulness Of Euthanasia Summary

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
976 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
J Gay Williams The Wrongfulness Of Euthanasia Summary
In this paper, I will discuss euthanasia and demonstrate its immoral implications using J. Gay-Williams’ essay, “The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia”; more specifically his attempt to show the wrongfulness of euthanasia through an argument from nature. I believe that the argument is valid and presents a very good approach for those who are opposed to euthanasia. Below is my effort to summarize this view by placing it in the standard argument format.

Argument from Nature 1) If there is a person in a situation, where a natural instinct compels them to take action, it is morally wrong to intentionally suppress that instinct. 2) In all euthanasia cases, there is a doctor is in a situation where their patient’s natural instinct …show more content…
The rules are as follows: 1) all the premises are reasonable 2) the conclusion follows 3) the argument does not beg the question. Premise one may be better explained in and of itself through an example having to do with a general, natural instinct. One example could be when someone is in a situation in which their family is put in harms way when an intruder with sinister motives enters their house. It is a natural reaction to protect that which belongs to you (in this situation your property-your “territory” and your blood- your family). To stand idly by and witness attacks upon your family and home, without in any way, making an effort to stop the attacks, would require an intentional suppression of a natural instinct. Premise two becomes more specific by stating that in euthanasia cases throughout, a doctor is always in a situation in which their patient’s natural instincts compel them (for as we saw in the quotes from J. Gay-Williams, a human’s conditioned response in all situations-based on the make-up of the body-is to function in a way that would always enable (or lean towards) continuity.) to survive. The way to show that this argument follows rule number two is to reveal its logical pattern. 1) If there is P (a person in a situation), where Q (a natural instinct compels them to take an action), it is R (morally wrong to …show more content…
Someone might say that the premise is generalizing when it says “all euthanasia cases”, because in certain cases of euthanasia a person might not be being kept alive through natural means any longer (such as: artificial life support); therefore, it can’t be said that the person’s natural instinct is to survive because without life support the person would have already died thus following the natural instinct towards death. My response to this objection would be the following: in my interpretation of J. Gay-Williams argument from nature, I used “In all euthanasia cases, there is a doctor is in a situation where their patient’s natural instinct compels them to survive.” As my second premise. And I must admit, that with this as the second premise, the argument is flawed as the objector revealed. However, if I were to make the second premise not end with “natural instinct compels them to survive” and rather put “natural instinct compels them” then it wouldn’t be a flawed argument. This is because it would merely be adding a twist on the argument, which Gay-Williams did not come right out and say, but it is implied. This twist that is implied is that it is morally wrong to go against any natural human instinct, and this includes the natural instinct of dying. Maybe then, the problem of removing someone or not removing someone from life support would no longer be the problem, due to the fact that
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Summary Of Physician Assisted Suicide
    • 146 Words
    • 1 Page

    Summary Of Physician Assisted Suicide

    The author examines the moral and ethical dilemma of a physician who take part in euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. He distinguishes the difference between passive euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Anson notes, that passive euthanasia is more acceptable due to the similarities of the American Medical Association's Code of Medical Ethics guidelines for withholding or removing life-sustaining intervention. However, the article also implied contradictions in the Hippocratic Oath against active euthanasia. Moreover, Anson examines the ideas based on proponents' views for active euthanasia, which patients who utilize life support systems are suffering agonizing and "leading to an undignified death". Although the article differs…

    • 146 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Physician Assisted Suicide Summary
    • 696 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Physician Assisted Suicide Summary

    and U.S. Law” by Stephen Hoffman is credible because he practices law in Minnesota where he also received his J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law School and his LL.M. from the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law. Hoffman’s purpose for the article is to explain the controversial and complex issues of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Hoffman explains the difference and similarity between euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide as well as classifying the different types such as ‘voluntary’ and ‘nonvoluntary.’ He states the difference between active and passive euthanasia which plays a role for a physician’s duty in a patient’s death. He also explains what medical doctrine of double effect is. Then he explains the common law necessity defense and a physician’s conflicting duties that deal with euthanasia. Later in the article, he explains the legal doctrines of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in European countries such as the United Kingdom, Switzerland and The Netherlands and states in North America such as Oregon, Washington, and…

    • 696 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Brock Examines Two Broad Lines Of Arguments Against Euthanasia
    • 1153 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Brock Examines Two Broad Lines Of Arguments Against Euthanasia

    To the idea that active voluntary euthanasia is incompatible with the doctor’s moral commitment to care for patients and protect life, Brock replies:…

    • 1153 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    James Rachel's Arguments Against Active Euthanasia
    • 1661 Words
    • 7 Pages

    James Rachel's Arguments Against Active Euthanasia

    On the other hand, active euthanasia would reduce the patient X’s time of suffering much more effectively, therefore honoring his wishes. It may be argued that by employing active euthanasia, I am infringing on my patient’s right to life, but it would be wise to remember the patient’s autonomous request that I help him end his suffering. As a physician, I also must consider my duties to patient X: the negative duty to avoid injury and the positive duty to bring aid. As mentioned previously, the duty to avoid injury is often weighted heavier than the duty to bring aid. However, in this application of the positive and negative duties to patient X, the weight of negative to positive duties may change due to his circumstances and his own position on the matter.…

    • 1661 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Rachels And Williams Arguments Against Euthanasia
    • 902 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Rachels And Williams Arguments Against Euthanasia

    Williams starts off the writing with the statement, “Although I respect the compassion that leads to this conclusion, I believe the conclusion is wrong. I want to show that euthanasia is wrong” (WEB). This shows that she is understanding of the view that it is right but feels that euthanasia is still wrong. The first augment is the argument of Nature which is stated, “Euthanasia does violence to this natural goal of survival. It is literally acting against nature because all the processes of nature are bent towards the end of bodily survival.” (WEB). This argument basically states that it is natural for a human to fight to live no matter what and when you provide an out for human it is unjust because it isn’t the way nature had intended it to be. The second point that is made is the argument for self-interest which is stated as, “We may think that we have no hope of recovery when, as a matter of fact, our chances are quite good. In such circumstances, if euthanasia were permitted, we would die needlessly.” (WEB). Basically this argument states that miracles do happen and if we allow doctors to end someone’s life it gives them no chance for the miracle. The last argument is the argument of practical effects which is described as, “It could have a…

    • 902 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Analysis of Philippa Foot's Article on Euthanasia
    • 1384 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Analysis of Philippa Foot's Article on Euthanasia

    Cited: Foot, Philippa. "Euthanasia." Ethics: History, Theory, and Contemporary Issues. 2nd ed. Eds. Steven M. Cahn and Peter Markie. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. 790-805…

    • 1384 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Essay: Euthanasia Derives From The Greak For A Good Death
    • 278 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Essay: Euthanasia Derives From The Greak For A Good Death

    The first and most important reason to oppose the euthanasia is that infringe humanism. Some opposers to euthanasia claim that because humanism implies the overriding value of human lives over all other things, physicians committed to humanism should always try to save life, but never involve in any killing, either euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. In fact, humanism is an ambiguous concept, and the value varies…

    • 278 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Active and Passive Euthanasia - Paper
    • 3008 Words
    • 13 Pages

    Active and Passive Euthanasia - Paper

    Abstract The traditional distinction between active and passive euthanasia requires critical analysis. The conventional doctrine is that there is such an important moral difference between the two that, although the latter is sometimes permissible, the former is always forbidden. This doctrine may be challenged for several reasons. First of all, active euthanasia is in many cases more humane than passive euthanasia. Secondly, the conventional doctrine leads to decisions concerning life and death on irrelevant grounds. Thirdly, the doctrine rests on a distinction between killing and letting die that itself has no moral importance. Fourthly, the most common arguments in favor of the doctrine are invalid. I therefore suggest that the American Medical Association policy statement that endorses this doctrine is unsound. (N Engl J Med 292:78-80, 1975) The distinction between active and passive euthanasia is thought to be crucial for medical ethics. The idea is that it is permissible, at least in some cases, to withhold treatment and allow a patient to die, but it is never permissible to take any direct action designed to kill the patient. This doctrine seems to be accepted by most doctors, and it is endorsed in a statement adopted by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association on December 4, 1973: The intentional termination of the life of one human being by another -mercy killing is contrary to that for which the medical profession stands and is contrary to the policy of the American Medical Association. The cessation of the employment of extraordinary means to prolong the life of the body when there is irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent is the decision of the patient and/or his immediate family. The advice and judgment of the physician should be freely available to the patient and/or his immediate family. However, a strong case can be made against this doctrine. In what follows I will set out some of…

    • 3008 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Morality Of Euthanasia Analysis
    • 672 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Morality Of Euthanasia Analysis

    According to James Rachels, in his essay “The Morality of Euthanasia,” the American Medical Association’s Conventional Doctrine in Euthanasia is false. The Conventional Doctrine states that there are certain situations in which letting someone die or passive euthanasia is morally permissible, but killing a patient or active euthanasia is not. For instance, in many circumstances a doctor can withhold treatment and will do nothing wrong if the patient were to die, but if the doctor were to provoke the death of the patient then it would be morally wrong. Rachels’ final goal is not to take a stand on the rightness or wrongness of euthanasia but instead show that if passive euthanasia is morally permissible then active euthanasia is also morally permissible. (define euthanasia)…

    • 672 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Active and Passive Euthanasia 2
    • 1527 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Active and Passive Euthanasia 2

    In this dissertation we will explore active and passive euthanasia, the brouhaha surrounding the two and which one is appropriate and morally sound for modern times. James Rachel has written a very poignant supposition on active and passive euthanasia. Though many disagree with him on the appropriateness of the practice as it relates to humans and what is considered alive. Some believe that one is dead when the brain is dead or in a comatose state.…

    • 1527 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Euthanasia Ethical Dilemma
    • 2102 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Euthanasia Ethical Dilemma

    1,672). A huge theme that society has seen in regards to euthanasia is the physician’s role. Physicians have been seen as murderers for assisting the death of their patients and they have been referred to as mercy-killers. However, many people tend to disregard the fact that even the physician, who is usually the one being blamed, can actually be the victim as well. According to the American Medical Association’s Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, it was stated that “although life-prolonging medical treatment may be withheld, the physician should not intentionally cause death” (as cited in Dickinson, Clark, Winslow & Marples, 2005, p. 44). In a study mentioned by Dickinson et al. (2005) it was found that when physicians were asked about whether or not active voluntary euthanasia (AVE) should be legalized, the percentage of those who were in favor of was between 35% and 71% (p.…

    • 2102 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Most Dangerous Game Instinct Analysis
    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Most Dangerous Game Instinct Analysis

    One might not always have time to reason, and acting upon instinct will happen naturally and will be the best course of action for that situation. For example, if you bump into a hot surface, your natural instinct will cause you to pull away quickly to avoid a severe burn. In The Most Dangerous Game, one commonly known instinct that Rainsford…

    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Utilitarianism and Euthanasia
    • 1031 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Utilitarianism and Euthanasia

    The moral issue that I will discuss about is Euthanasia. Euthanasia simplu means bringing the death of another for the benefit of that person and also known as mercy killing. “When a person carries out an act of euthanasia, he brings about the death of another person because he believes the latter's present existence is so bad that she would be better off dead, or believes that unless he intervenes and ends her life, it will become so bad that she would be better off dead” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). There are two forms of euthanasia; voluntary and non-voluntary. Voluntary euthanasia means if it’s coming from the patient him or herself. Non - voluntary means a family member making the decision for the patient. In an active euthanasia which is illegal, it is saying that you are performing direct action to take someone’s life. In a passive euthanasia which is legal, it is allowing someone to die by not performing some life sustaining action. What does euthanasia has to do with morality? My morality behind euthanasia is that euthanasia should be the right to die for patients who are intensely ill. Euthanasia is natural in a way because in real life, there is a matter of life and death. It is natural for people to live but death is also part of nature. No one can live forever, and since euthanasia is performed on people facing serious illness and facing death. Euthanasia seems to understand the course of nature and its ways by letting the patient wish be fulfilled and let them die in peace instead of suffering in pain.…

    • 1031 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Voluntary Active Euthanasia
    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Voluntary Active Euthanasia

    The main support behind euthanasia is the fact that it must be voluntarily active. Some people may have different views of what they consider competent to make this decision. Some people may not be competent to make this decisions, but could be deceived by family or physicians into stating their support euthanasia when they are not competent to make this decision. This could be a way for family members and physicians to end having to deal with the “difficulties” of the patient. It is difficult to define competent and a person may have a different view of what they view as competent. One’s view of being competent to make this serious decision could mean the person is actually being passively non voluntarily euthanized. Defining what is classified as competent could lead to issues with voluntary active euthanasia being considered moral. This form of euthanasia would go against all forms of self-determination and would therefore undermine one’s support for voluntary active…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    J. Gay-Williams: The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia.
    • 802 Words
    • 3 Pages

    J. Gay-Williams: The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia.

    His first argument is about the arguments from nature. He tells about the natural reasons why should a person not commit Euthanasia. Euthanasia is literally acting against nature because all the processes of nature are bent towards the end of bodily survival. Euthanasia defeats these subtle mechanisms in a way that, in a particular case, disease and injury might not. It is enough to believe and to recognize that the organization of the human body and our patterns of behavioral responses make the continuation of life a natural goal. By this reason alone, Williams argues the purpose of Euthanasia. Euthanasia sets us against the nature. Furthermore, in doing so, euthanasia does violence to a person 's dignity. The dignity comes from seeking their ends. When one of the person 's goals is survival, and actions are taken that eliminate that goal, then the natural dignity suffers. Unlike animals,…

    • 802 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics