Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • The Elements of Moral Philosophy - Chapter 1-2 PDF

    Uploaded by

    Francis Gabriel Abog
    4 views19 pages

    Original Title

    The Elements of Moral Philosophy - Chapter 1-2.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    4 views19 pages

    The Elements of Moral Philosophy - Chapter 1-2 PDF

    Uploaded by

    Francis Gabriel Abog

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 19
    ‘The Elements of Moral Philosophy SEVENTH EDITION JAMEs RACHELS Editions 5-7 by Stuart RACHELS = tet) ten amen Pea non (Giclentnch WE Otescae sete Ve sx eee ome ‘Schnee in ron on ee woe hess fal oy mm Baek oy ea ah ‘einai tran eters {Sj 0 Se gy a About the Authors \Jowes Ractss (1941-2008) wrote The End of Life Buthonasia ‘and Morality (1086), Created from Animals: The Moral Implications 6 Darwinism (1990), Can Bis Provide Answers? And Other Bisoys fn Moral Philesophy (1997), Prodlems from Philosophy (Gt edi- ton, 2005), and The Legacy of Socrates: Essays in Moral Philosophy {20017 His website s wre jamesracheli.org Sruawr Racatts is Astociate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Alabama, He has revised several of James Rachels’ books, including Problemsfrom Phiosopy (thine edition, 2012) and The Right Thing Do (sixth edition, 9012), which isthe com= panion anthology to this book, Stuart won the United States hess Championship in 1989, a the age of 20, and today he isa Bronze Life Master at bridge. His website Is von jamesrachels, ong stuart. Contents Preface [About the Seventh Eltion WHAT IS MORALITY? 1, The Problem of Defiston 12. int Beampl Bly Thro 12, ‘Second Beompl Joie and Mary LA, Third Beale Tro Latins 13. Reson na impartial 16 The Minimum Compton of Morb “THE CHALLENGE OF CULTURAL RELATIVISM 21. ilernt Cures Have Diet Moral odes 22. Caltual Relate 23. The ltl Difference Argument 2A. Whet Rls from Cure! Relation 25. Why The I Les Duagreanent Than Ii Sens 26 Some Vates Ae Shaed by ll Cults 22. Judaing a Cala! Price Be Undesirable 28 “Bac othe Five Clans 29, What We Can Leas fom Cute! Relation curr 1 What Is Morality? ‘We are dissing no small matter, buthow we ought to ve. ‘Socnats, tv Pearo's RPI (a, 390.0) 1.1, The Problem of Definition ‘Moral philosophy is the study of what morality it and what it requires of us. As Socrates sid, i's about “haw we ought © Tive*vand why. Tt would be heipfol if we could begin with a ‘imple, uncontroversial definition of what morality is, but that turns out to be impossible. There are many rival theories, each expounding a different conception of what it means to five ‘orally, and any definition that goes beyond Socrates's simple ormulation is bound to offend atleast one of them, "This should make vs cautious, but it need not paralyze ws. Jn this chapter, Iwill deseribe the “minimum conception” of morality Av the name suggests, the minimum conception is 8 ote thavevery moral teory should accept, at least as starting point. First however, we will examine some moral controver- Res having t0 do with handicapped children. Our discusion ‘ll bring out the features of the minimum conception. 1.2, First Example: Baby Theresa “Theresa Ann Campo Pearson, an infant known to the public as “Baby Theresa," was born in Florida in 1992. Baby Theresa had lancncephaly, one of the worst genetic disorders. Anencephalic Infants are sometimes referred to as “babies without brains,” ‘but that is not quite accurate. Important parts of the brain— the cerebrum and cerebellum—are missing, ass the top of the Skull. The brain stem, however, stil there, and so the baby fan sil breathe and posress 4 heartbeat. In the United States, ‘most cases ofanencephaly are detected during pregnancy, and the feuses are usaly aborted. OF those not tbored. al are sillbor, About 850 are bom alive each year, and they estaly die thin day ‘Baby Theres’ story is remarkable only because her par ents made an until request. Knowing tha thet baby woul die soon and could never be conscious, Theresa's parents a tnteered her organs for immediate tanoplane They thought her Kidney er, heat, hing and eyes should go to oer ehildren who could benefit from then Her physictans agreed. ‘Thousands ofnganss need ansplant cach yea, and Gere are never enough organs avaiable: But Theresa's organs were not taken, because Florida law forbids the removal of organs unl the donor is dead By the time Baby Theresa died, sine day Inter iewas to ite—her organs had deteriorated too much to ie harvested and tanapantea Baby Therea’s eave was widely debated, Should she have been killed 50 that her ongane cond have been used to ate ‘other children? A number of professional "ethiie’—people Employed by uniersien, hoepals, and law sthools, who get paid o think about such thingr-were ated by the presto fomment, Most of them diagreed withthe parents and phy. Sicans. Instead, they appealed to timehonored philosophical Principes vo oppose talung the organs. It ust seems too hor- Piping io use people ar means to ctber people's ends sid one such expert Another explained: “Its unethical to hil person ‘A'o sate person B" Anda third sled “Wiat the parents are really asking fr, Kl this dying baby so that ts organs thay be used for someone ele, Well that's realy horrendous proposition.” Ts ichorrendous? Opinions were dvded. These ehcits thought so, while the parens and doctors didnot. But we are Interested fn more than what people happen ota We want {© know what's tue. Were the parents tight or wrong to val Untcer their babys ongans for trngplan? To answer tis ey tion, me have to ask what easony or argument can be gen ‘on cach ide, What canbe sa oath paren request oF tous oppenng thei request ‘The Benefits Argument. The parents believed that Theresa's organs were daing her no good, because she was not conscious waurismomure and would ie soon anyway. The other children, however, coukd ‘eno from tiem, Ths he parents seem to have reasoned Freer bn mene wtbout harwing anyone ee, we outdo LETeauplantng te ogo ould Bet thot chiten without ‘Boning aly Thera, Theor ough 0 anaplant he nan Tha dare Noten argent hogan In aon ong bat arguments can be given oration, we so want 10 Know wether thove arguments sre acy ood. General speak Wee arguments sound i is animpsons ae true and the 2 hiog Toons logally from Gem. In this eas, we might $Shndet about the antertion that Theresa wouldnt be harmed ‘SReralsshe would de, and int Deing alive better than Being Jee But on reflection seems clear that in these tragic = ‘Sommances, the parents were right Bei alive ia benef only {Fienablesyouucary onaceies and have thoughts, feeling, stone wath otter peoplein other words if enables fonts havea Be Without suc tings, biological existence sk Tae Therefore, ce thagh theresa ight rein ave or afew move days it would do her no goo ‘rahe Benet Argument, therefore, provides a powerful season for tanspantng une ongons, What arguments exist 00 the other ide? " “The Argument That We Should Not Use People as Means, The Tics who opposed the sapsplants offered two argument There ws based on te es Chat ii wong to we fol att te pple’ ends Taking Theres’ organs would be ng hero Benet the other children; therefor, itshould not hs anument sound The ea tha we sould nota" ples obvoaly appealing, bat this a vague notion that Peds wo be clarited What exety dos it mean? “Using peo- BEE pea invoives wating their sazmom—teit ably C0 eid tor temacles how to lve dtr own Ties according £9 eee desires and values A peron’s autonomy may be Mo- Jnted rough manipulation, ticker. or deceie For example, ries) teed to Be your frend, when Yam only incrested ia fing but wth your ster, or may eto You so you give me ao rT may try to convince you that you wil enjoy going BeBTTonten when Tony wan jo to give me aide, fn each Coe" Y'am inanipalasng you in order t get something for rong {cong bcs har people away ake decisions, she as no desites, nd she caoot lke aoe thing. Would taking her “ rnin any obs ‘ory significant sense? We would, of course, be eye hee ‘organs for someone eles benef ut we doth err ene we Pes i transplant, We would also be using her grins A ut her permission. Would ‘hat make it wrong? Irwe ere ‘ing thm ein her shay thn hat wuld be eon for ind others must do itfor them, there are two reasonable pusde, ecuie cette ah ee ar Dime hav sendy noted her ier wi ot aed She aces We migh ah sh cul lw wha se won whl ol sy Tis sor of dhought is sel when we are dealing wih Beople who have preferences (or once had them) bet Canna expr vem ‘example, a comatose patient who signed a {ig will before slipping iio the coma, But sly Baby Tce tons. The upshot is that we are lef todo what we tink a heey “The Argument fom the W ‘i Atom tom te Wong of tg Te es {sot ana. Taking There's orate would be keg hey me ater, the sd, aking ihe rgunt would be wong. cena hartoment oud The proton agua lig zat amony te mow imporae mara dct Neen ieee aterm lk mx ape ak thee ae exceptions sachs bn setideene ee Sothern whether taking Baby exes one ae aided san cxepton te hele These ea to think so: Baby Theresa sot conscious; she will never have a iif: she is going to die soon; and taking her organs would heip the other babies. Anyone who accepts this wll Tegard the arg tent as awed, Usually itis wrong to ill one person to save nother, but not always, “There is another posibilty. Perhaps we should regard ‘Baby Theresa as already dead If tis sounds crazy, bear in mind that our conception of death has changed over the years. In {1007 the South African doctor Christiaan Barnard performed the fist heart transplant in human beings. This was an excit {ng development, heat transplants could potendaly save many thes, Ie was not clear, however, whether any lives could be saved fo the United States. Back then, American law understood (Qeats as occurring when the heart stops Beating. But once 2 hheart stops beating, it quickly degrades and becomes unsuit- able for teansplant. Thus, under American law, itwas not clear ‘ehether any hearts could be legally harvested for transplant. So, American law changed, We now understand death as occur ng. not when the hearsstops beating, but when the brain stops Furetoning “brain death” Is our nev end-oflife standard. This Solved the problem about transplants, because a braindead ‘patient can stl have a healthy hear, suitable for transplant ‘Rnencephalies do not meet the technical requirements for brain death ast currently defined; but perhaps the defi- inidon should be revised to nchude them. After al, they lack ny hope for conscious life, because they have no cerebrum or erebelum. Ir the desnition of brain death were eforrmulaced fo include anencephalis, we would become accustomed tothe jen that these unfortunate infants are born dead, and s0 take ing their organs would aot involve killing them. The Argument from the Wrongness of Kiling would then be moot ‘On the whole, then, the arguments in favor of transplant ing Baby Theresa's organs seem stronger than the arguments against i 1.3. Second Example: Jodie and Mary {In August 2000, a young woman from Gozo, an island south of Tay, discovered that she was carrying conjoined twins. Know ing that the healtreate facilites on Gozo were inadequate {0 (Gea with such a birth, she and her husband went co St. Mary's Hospital in Manchester, England, The infants, known as Ma anda ner eat ores omen Ter apes were fsed, and they had one heart and one pat of lungs between them jodie the stronger one, wa prong Hood fo hersce, No one knows how many set of conjoined ins ae Dorn ach year, but dhe number has been estimated at 20, Mest de ‘hod afer birth, but some do well They grow to adulood aund marry and heve children themscves. But the outlook fot Mary and Jodie was grim, The doctors said that witout Ines tention the gis would die within six months, The only hope Yas an operation to separate them, This would save Joo, bat Mary woutd de immediacy The parens, who were devout Catholics, refused permis: sion for the eperation on the grounds that would hasten Mary's death, "We believe that nature should take its course the Ii Go's wl that be urchin thou nt survive then 3 bet" The hospi, hoping to ave Ji: pth tioned the counts for permision to peronn the eparaton any. way. The courts agreed, and the operation was performed he {xpected, Joie ved and Mary dea Tn thinking about this tse, we should distinguish the «question of who should mate the dao fom the question of that the decision shold be, You might chink, for eesmple, hat the decision should be left o the parents and so the cours should nothave intruded. But there remains the separate ques tion of what would be the wisest choice forthe parents (Fay. one eke) to make, We wil focus on that question Would it be fight or wrong to separate the tins? ‘The Argument That We Should Save as Many as We Can. The rationale for separating the twins it that we have a choice between saving one infant or leting both die. Isn't it plainly Detter to save one? This argument is to appealing that many people will conclude, without further thought, that the tins should be separated, At the height of the controversy, the Ladies’ Home Journal commissioned a poll to discover what Americans thought The poll showed that 78% approved ofthe cperation. People were obviously perruaded by the ides that should save as many a we can odie and May's parent, however, bli is an even stionger argument on “The Argument from the Sanctty of Human Life. The parents Toved both of their children, and they thought it would be twrong to ill one of them even to save the other. Of course, they were not alone in thinking this. The idea that all human Iifels precious, regardless of age, race, socal class, or handicap, |S at the core of the Western moral tradition It is especialy ‘mphasized in religious writings. In traditional ethics, the pro- fibition against Kling innocent humans is absolute. I does fot matter if the killing would serve a good purpose; it simply Taowot be done. Mary fan innocent human being, and so she say not be killed "he judges bend Ts this argument sound? The judges who heard the case did not think so, fora suaprising reason. They denied thatthe ‘Speration would kill Mary. Lord Justice Robert Walker said that he operation would merely separate Mary from her sister and then aie would die, not because she was intentionally killed, Dut because her own body cannot sustain her life” In other ‘wordy, the operation wouldn't kil her; her body’s weakness ‘would, And #0, the morality of killing is irrelevant : ‘The Lor Justice, however, hat mised the point. tdoesn’t matter wheter we sy that Marys death is caused by the opera” don of by her body's own weakness. Either way, she willbe dead, [and we will knowingly have hastened her death. Thar’ the idea iichind the traditional prohibition against killing dhe innocent, "Tere in however, moe natural objection to the Arie ment fom the Sancti of Life, Peshaps itis notalways wrong t0| Ell ianocent human beings, For example, such killings may be ‘ght when three conditions are met: (a) the innocent humar. Ines no future because she is going to die soon no matter what; {a) the innocent human has no wish to go on living, perhaps ‘Because she has ‘no wishes at all and (c) this killing wil save thers, who can go on to lead full lives. In these rare circum: Seances the killing ofthe innocent might be justified 1A, Third Example: Tracy Latimer ny Later x12 year vim of cerebral ply, was ile Prgr nein teks Tracy ned wth hr family on 9 pre 2 ae Gekachewam Canada, One Sondsy morning wile feta in Saihee chen meres hore, Robert Lauer ane fa ea fis pchup tuck and piped in exhast 8 THEELEMENTSOF MORALFiELOSOPINY fumes unl sedi, At the ime of her death, Tray weghe tess han 40 pounds nd she was densbed a “hincbnigg at tEe mona el ofa nee moth baby" is. Latin These wa ceed nd Trey Sead ens are home hd added thatshe "ia have be courage todo eherce Robert Ladmes was ed for aude butte udge and jy did ot ato ea hm hrchly The fury fur en flea ony second-degree mur abd recommend hat {he Judge hove the moda 10year sentence The fu ee ne te een tod car of coninement ti fay But the Supree Court Elite peda red tat he pandasy seen imu te impose, Robert Laer entered pron S00 was paroled in 2008. " w0hand ogi questone aide did Mr, Latimer do anyhing ‘wrong? This case involves many ofthe ines that we sain the Othe cue One argent ageing Mi Lather tat Tray ie war moclyprotous and soe bad no righ toil he Inn ule, Emap be that Tag oon wa 0 catastrophic that she had no prospects of a “fe” in any but a biological sense. Her existence had been reduced to pointless Sleing, and ing her war an at of ery: Coetdering thowe argument appears that Robe Late acted defen Uap Thele eres hone other pon ade by i ees epee Sree eer snes pe aunt tare anne enna tice ete rr ae ee tnd Ret ne en ee TE ue a Reg “The Slippery Slope Argument, When the Canadian Supreme Court umeld Robert Latimer’ sentence, the director of the ‘Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres sid that Se was “pleasantly surprised." "Tt would have feally been the Ltippery slope, and opening tne doors to other people to decide tra should ve and who should die," she said. ‘Other disability advocates echoed this idea. We may feel sympathy for Robert Latimer, it was said we may even think Tac Tiacy Latimer is better off dead. However, itis dangerous to think ike this, I'we accept any sort of mercy killing, we will {fide down 2 “slippery lape," and atthe bottom ofthe slope all Hie wil be held cheap. Where vil we draw the line? If Tracy’s life not worth protecting, what about the lives of other dis ibled people? What about the elderly, the infirm, and other iseles shembers of society? In this context, Hits program of Stacal purification” is often mentioned, implying that we Will end up like the Nazis fe take the fis step ‘Similar “slippery slope arguments” have been used on ‘other isaves. Abortion, in vite fertlization (IVF), and Iruman Cloning have all been opposed because of what they might feed t6 Sometimes, in hindsight, itis evident that the worsies there unfounded. This has happened with IVF, a technique for

    You might also like