Ronald Dworkin on abortion and assisted suicide.

F M Kamm
{"title":"Ronald Dworkin on abortion and assisted suicide.","authors":"F M Kamm","doi":"10.1023/a:1012755208057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the first part of this article, I raise questions about Dworkin's theory of the intrinsic value of life and about the adequacy of his proposal to understand abortion in terms of different ways of valuing life. In the second part of the article, I consider his argument in \"The Philosophers' Brief on Assisted Suicide\", which claims that the distinction between killing and letting die is morally irrelevant, the distinction between intending and foreseeing death can be morally relevant but is not always so. I argue that the killing/letting die distinction can be relevant in the context of assisted suicide, but also show when it is not. Then I consider why the intention/foresight distinction can be morally irrelevant and conclude by presenting an alternative argument for physician-assisted suicide.</p>","PeriodicalId":514581,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Ethics","volume":"5 3","pages":"221-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1023/a:1012755208057","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1012755208057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In the first part of this article, I raise questions about Dworkin's theory of the intrinsic value of life and about the adequacy of his proposal to understand abortion in terms of different ways of valuing life. In the second part of the article, I consider his argument in "The Philosophers' Brief on Assisted Suicide", which claims that the distinction between killing and letting die is morally irrelevant, the distinction between intending and foreseeing death can be morally relevant but is not always so. I argue that the killing/letting die distinction can be relevant in the context of assisted suicide, but also show when it is not. Then I consider why the intention/foresight distinction can be morally irrelevant and conclude by presenting an alternative argument for physician-assisted suicide.

罗纳德·德沃金关于堕胎和协助自杀的研究。
在本文的第一部分,我对德沃金关于生命内在价值的理论提出了质疑,并对他从不同的生命价值方式来理解堕胎的建议是否适当提出了质疑。在文章的第二部分,我考虑了他在《哲学家关于协助自杀的简报》中的观点,他声称,杀死和让死亡之间的区别在道德上是无关的,故意死亡和预见死亡之间的区别在道德上是相关的,但并不总是如此。我认为,在辅助自杀的背景下,杀人/任其死亡的区别可能是相关的,但也表明,当它不是。然后,我考虑为什么意图/预见的区别在道德上是无关紧要的,并通过提出医生协助自杀的另一种论点来结束。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书