Religion and Bioethics: Physician Assisted Suicide, a Religious Perspective
The article I read examined the link between bioethics and religion in regards to Physician-Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia. Specifically, it made an obvious point of defining the distinction between killing and letting one die. In addition, it focused on the link between Faith and Reason, the development of tradition throughout history, modern statements on this ethical dilemma, and then drew conclusions based upon these analyses. These are all significant points to consider when attempting to determine the morality of physician-assisted suicide/euthanasia.
In order to fully understand the “euthanasia debate,” it is crucial to look at our two main theoretical camps: deontological or “Kantian” ethics, and teleological or “utilitarian” ethics. Both sides make valid points regarding this bioethical issue. Therefore, in order to form your own opinion/make conclusions on this matter, it is crucial to have substantial knowledge regarding the assertions on both sides of the argument – this is the only way in which to truly make sound arguments/draw valid conclusions.
Immanuel Kant’s deontological theory of ethics is the normative ethical position that evaluates the morality of actions. Unlike the empiricist supporters of Utilitarianism, Kant was an unquestionable supporter of rationalism; the idea that pure reason can tell us how the world is, independent of experience. This idea is referred to as an a priori approach, because it makes the assumption that reasoning or knowledge is denoted from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience.
To followers of this theory the act itself must be morally right. It is for this reason that the deontological perspective would be considered one of ethical absolutism or objectivism, rather than ethical relativism. In this case, supporters of Kant’s theory would argue that there are moral rules which hold for all persons in all situations, and which allow for no exception. They might even take this
In order to fully understand the “euthanasia debate,” it is crucial to look at our two main theoretical camps: deontological or “Kantian” ethics, and teleological or “utilitarian” ethics. Both sides make valid points regarding this bioethical issue. Therefore, in order to form your own opinion/make conclusions on this matter, it is crucial to have substantial knowledge regarding the assertions on both sides of the argument – this is the only way in which to truly make sound arguments/draw valid conclusions.
Immanuel Kant’s deontological theory of ethics is the normative ethical position that evaluates the morality of actions. Unlike the empiricist supporters of Utilitarianism, Kant was an unquestionable supporter of rationalism; the idea that pure reason can tell us how the world is, independent of experience. This idea is referred to as an a priori approach, because it makes the assumption that reasoning or knowledge is denoted from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience.
To followers of this theory the act itself must be morally right. It is for this reason that the deontological perspective would be considered one of ethical absolutism or objectivism, rather than ethical relativism. In this case, supporters of Kant’s theory would argue that there are moral rules which hold for all persons in all situations, and which allow for no exception. They might even take this