Requests for voluntary euthanasia are extremely rare in situations where the physical, emotional and spiritual needs of terminally ill patients are properly met. As the symptoms which prompt the request for euthanasia can be almost always managed with therapies currently available, our highest priority must be to ensure that top quality terminal care is readily available. While recognizing the importance of individual patient autonomy, history has clearly demonstrated that legalized euthanasia poses
due to moral and ethical principles, objection to war due to strong religious beliefs, the objection to violence due to the same ideals above, objection to the government's use of force, and the objection to the use of weapons of mass destruction. Many of the core beliefs of conscientious objection derive from the teachings or beliefs of pacifism. Pacifism has been a system of thinking and living for hundreds of years, and, in the 20th century many objection and pacifistic movements have sprung up
Two Marxist Objections to Exploitation ABSTRACT: I argue that we can find in Marx two objections to exploitation: (i) an entitlement objection according to which it is wrongful because of the unjust distribution of benefits and burdens it generates; and (ii) an expressivist objection according to which it is objectionable because of the kind of social relation it is. The expressivist objection is predicated on a communitarian strand in Marx's thought, whereas the entitlement objection is grounded
Wittgenstein's 1913 Objections To Russell's Theory of Belief: A Dialectical Reading ABSTRACT: In what follows, I give (following Burton Dreben) a dialectical reading of his dismissal of metaphysics and of Wittgenstein's objections to Russell in 1913. I argue that Wittgenstein must be read as advocating no particular theory or doctrine — that is, philosophy is an activity and not a body of truths. Furthermore, this insistence is thoroughgoing. Put differently, a dialectical reading must be applied
Objections to Charles Peirce's Article, A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God ABSTRACT: Charles S. Peirce sketches "a nest of three arguments for the Reality of God" in his article "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God." I provide careful analysis and explication of Peirce's argument, along with consideration of some objections. I argue that (1) there are significant differences between Peirce's neglected argument and the traditional arguments for God's existence; (2) Peirce's analysis
the distinctness of brain states of mental states. Mary, who is a materialist, presents several objections to that argument. Her main objection corresponds to the first/third-person approach. She believes that Dave presents that argument only from the first-person approach, which is introspection, and totally disregards the third-person approach, which is observation of another mind. Mary’s objections will follow by the Dave’s response on them from the dualist’s point of view. The purpose of the
attempt to radicalize his difference from a developing Nyaya extensionalist theory of the pramanas, a theory in which the Buddhists and the Naiyayikas are closer than anywhere else. In verse nine of his Vigrahavyavartani, Nagarjuna thematizes an objection to his skeptical "middle" position in the following way. If all things were devoid of an intrinsic nature, there would, nevertheless, be an absence of intrinsic nature (yadi sarvadharmanam svabhava na bhavet tatrani nihsvabhava bhavet). But then
The Moral Question in Hamlet's Soliloquy - To be or not to be... "The major question in 'To be or not to be' cannot be suicide. If it were, as many have noted, it would be dramatically irrelevant. Hamlet is no longer sunk in the depths of melancholy, as he was in his first soliloquy. He has been roused to action and has just discovered how to test the Ghost's words. When we last saw him, only five minutes before, he was anticipating the night's performance, and in only a few moments we shall
practice desirable character traits. I believe that the moral agent concept is the ethical way to conduct yourself as a lawyer. I will defend my thesis by offering reasons for my position, including moral theories, objections to my position using moral theories, and responses to the objections which are stated. My first reason that the moral agent concept is ethical is there is a point when the moral agent will not worry about winning the case because to win the case would involve unethical actions. This
I agree with Lafollette and shall focus on supporting him by addressing the most practical objections: There is no reliable procedure for identifying competent parents and it is impossible to reasonably enforce parent regulations. I shall address these objections and their reasoning, followed by responses that Lafollette and myself would most likely have, thereby refuting the objections. The first objection to Lafollette’s argument is that “…there may not be, or we may not be able to discover, adequate
there are many valid objections to this argument, I am in agreement with Norcross and shall be supporting him in this paper. I think the two most practical objections are that (1) most consumers don’t know how the animals are treated whereas Fred clearly does, and (2) if Fred stops enjoying chocolate, no puppies will be tortured, but if a person becomes a vegetarian, no animals will be saved due to the small impact of one consumer. I shall explain the reasoning behind these objections and then present
is what is unavoidable in the novel Childhood’s End. The overlords came to earth with overwhelming power and technology and very easily, with hardly any resistance at all became the supreme rulers of earth. They made rules and laws with no objection by the human race. In the beginning an opposition did oppose the overlords, but it died out shortly after Karellen’s announcement to come down to earth in 50 years. But now, 50 years later one man is starting the rebellion, Jan Rodricks. He
discussion of the former can be applied to our puzzle concerning the latter. One response to the objection that the notion of internal sovereignty is inapplicable because no group in society holds unlimited political power is to distinguish between different types of internal sovereignty, such as legal and electoral sovereignty. The resolution of the puzzle lies in applying this response strategy to the objection that the notion of external sovereignty is inapplicable because no state is completely independent
hold due to its vulnerability to circularity. This does not, however, necessitate that the Meditations must fail. Rather, if the meditations are approached in the order with which Descartes originally created them, the circularity and many of the objections disappear. We must not loose sight of Descartes’ goal of these meditations: to unearth “the foundational science from which the whole system of science can be derived” (Menn 549) through which it cannot be denied that “[knowledge of God is] the
first raise objections to Schellenberg’s formulation of the argument and then suggest some improvements. My main improvement is to include among the divine attributes the property of strongly desiring humanity’s love. Since to love God requires at least believing that he exists, if God were to exist, he must want widespread theistic belief. The fact that so many people lack such belief becomes a good argument for atheism with respect to God conceived of in the given way. Some objections to this line
I will accomplish this by first giving arguments for why the only thing we desire for its own sake is pleasure, as well as arguments for why it is best to keep our desires simple. I will then take a look at a number of objections and give some reasons as to why these objections are unconvincing. Before I can begin with the argumentative side of the paper, it is necessary that some background information on Epicurus be given. Epicurus was both a hedonist as well as an egoist, and was very
one’s duties require one to lie or commit something else that is not traditionally viewed along with justice; that too is considered just by Plato’s accounts in ‘The Republic.’ I believe Plato’s account of justice, and his likely defense against objections are both clear and logical, thus I will endeavor to argue his views as best as I can. Plato’s view of justice ties in with his view of a perfect world. In Plato’s ideal world, the society would be a wise one, wise in understanding that their own
the healing process once the murderer is put to death. Response to objections to the thesis (1) Objection: The death penalty should be abolished because even the highest form of punishment will not remove the evil from society. Response: If the death penalty was abolished, the convicted murderer has the potential to escape and kill again. This will spread more evil and give the option to kill again to the murderer. (2) Objection: The execution of a convicted murderer will never bring the victims
obey their governments on the ground that, under circumstances different from the ones in which they now find themselves, they would have agreed to submit to its authority. (1) The purpose of this paper is to rescue hypothetical consent from this objection. I begin by distinguishing political legitimacy from political obligation. (2) I argue that while hypothetical consent may not serve as an adequate ground for political obligation, it is capable of grounding political legitimacy. I understand
deserted island. Jack’s world, before arrival on the island, consisted of a “ voluntary adherence to a pragmatic pact of nonagression…which passes for civilization, but maintained only through fear';(Whissen 140). Once the fear of objection from society is taken away so is the pact of nonviolence and the civilized being reverts to savage barbarism. This evil only takes place when all his restrictions were removed. Alex is the hoodlum that has a love for violence and rape. He wages rampages