Study sets, textbooks, questions
Upgrade to remove ads
Arts and Humanities
Phil 1020- Exam 2 (Kivatinos)
Terms in this set (54)
What are the 2 forms of aid in dying?
Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide
A physician causing a patients death/killing a patient
aka. mercy killing
A physician provides the patient with the means in which a patient takes their own life
Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS)
An organization of medical practitioners who aim to promote the quality and development of the healthcare profession and give a voice to the medical community
American Medical Association (AMA)
Jack Kevorkian was known as
The role of a medical practitioner is the role of a healer and protecting life from illness
Role of a healer principle
Life is sacred and should be preserved and protected, not taken
Sanctity of life principle
Principle that states to do no harm to others
Principle of non-maleficence
Causing death; killing (ex. lethal injection)
Letting die; not killing (ex. turning off life support)
Who critiques the AMAs policy of active and passive euthanasia?
How does AMA view active and passive euthanasia
active- morally guilty
passive- morally innocent
AMA approves of PE because it serves the goal of preventing the patients needless suffering, but AE better serves that goal because it provides a quicker, more painless, more humane method of facilitating death.
James Rachels main argument
God is the only one who should take life
Playing God criticism
Doing what is humane is ground that AID stands on. Not providing AID is abandoning compassion and fails to provide human treatment.
Focused on free choice and autonomy. Preventing AID is to restrict or deny rights to self determination.
Rights and self determination argument
Jack Kevorkian's response to playing God
Playing God is unavoidable and a necessary part of medicine
What arguments does Callahan critique?
Objection to rights argument, objection of compassion argument, and says medicine is incompatible with AID
There is no satisfactory way to practice AID since it can not be practiced in a way that is both responsible and discriminatory. It must be practiced either selectively or unselectively.
The role and purpose of medicine is incompatible with AID, and would force medicine to step outside its proper role.
Callahans main argument
Anti Aid in dying
AMA and Daniel Callahan
Pro Aid in dying
Jack Kevorkian and James Rachels
Standards for moral evaluation introduced by capital punishment
Justice and moral progress/advancement of civilization
Pro death penalty
Anti Death penalty
Jimmy Dore and Jeffery Reiman
CP is morally unwarranted and should be maintained, because it deters people from committing murder
The deterrence argument
CP is morally warranted, because it serves justice. Justice is served when people get what they deserve. CP serves justice because it satisfies the eye for eye principle
Pragers justice argument
Punishment should match the crime in kind and degree. We should do to them what they did to victims
Eye for eye principle
Formal title for eye to eye principle
means law of retaliation
Treat others how you would want to be treated
Although CP is just a form of punishment (justice) abolishing CP would contribute to the advancement of civilization (moral progress) Because the death penalty is primitive, uncivilized and barbaric we should abolish it
Reimans main argument
Main difference between Dore and Reimans argument
Reiman's more explicit about using progress of civilization as main argument
Reiman concedes that CP is just a form of punishment for murders, because murders deserve CP
The basis of the argument is to respect life. He says "if we are going to murder murderers, why don't we rape rapists?" This is to prove that we would rather kill someone than rape someone, even though killing is worse. His main point is we either value life, or we don't and we either use violence to solve our problems or we don't. His last main point is that killing is probably more merciful in a sense than keeping them in prison for life.
Dores main argument
Pragers argument appeals to our
Dore and Reimans arguments appeal to our
T/F - James Rachels' discussion of euthanasia suggests that if passive euthanasia is considered morally permissible, then active euthanasia should be considered permissible as well.
T/F - If John Doe believes that it is never permissible for a physician to intentionally allow for a patient's death to occur by withholding medical treatment, then John Doe would agree with the AMA's policies about how a physician should or should not act
T/F - James Rachels' discussion of euthanasia lends support to Jack Kevorkian's view about euthanasia and assisted suicide
T/F - To criticize the AMA's policy on euthanasia, James Rachels argues that the bare difference between killing and letting die does not, in itself, make a moral difference. Therefore, if a doctor lets a patient die, for humane reasons, he is in the same moral position as if he had given the patient a lethal injection for humane reasons.
T/F - Although Jack Kevorkian's argument about rights is an argument that conflicts with the AMA's policy on euthanasia, this argument lends support to the AMA's policy on physician assisted suicide.
T/F - The lex talionis principle lends support to the idea that killing is sometimes morally justified, and the lex talionis principle lends support to the AMA's policy on assisted suicide.
T/F - Although Daniel Callahan and Jeffrey Reiman argue about different controversies that concern the practice of killing, they each offer arguments that support the idea that killing is a practice that we should not engage in
T/F - If Jane Doe firmly supports the role-as-healer principle, then Jane has reason to support the AMA's view, Daniel Callahan's view, and Jack Kevorkian's view on whether a physician should be permitted to engage in mercy killing or to assist in their patients' suicides.
False ( Wouldn't support Kevorkian)
T/F - Daniel Callahan suggests that it is not medicine's place to determine if or when the burden of life is too great to be endured.
T/F - Daniel Callahan argues that physician assisted suicide cannot be defended by relying on the idea that patients have a right to self-determination
T/F - Daniel Callahan argues that if we accept Kevorkian's arguments in favor of physician assisted suicide, then we would end up practicing aid-in-dying in a way that is either discriminatory and unfair, on one hand, or irresponsible and non-protective, on the other hand.
T/F - Daniel Callahan argues that if we legalized assisted suicide here in the U.S., this would have the harmful effect of lessening the value that Americans place upon life, which would likely result in an increased murder rate in the U.S.
T/F - If someone very strongly agreed with the sanctity of life principle, then they would have reason to support Jimmy Dore's view about the death penalty
T/F - Jeffrey Reiman agrees that murderers deserve the death penalty, and the death penalty is a just punishment for murderers.
T/F - The deterrence argument against the death penalty reflects or relies on the way of thinking that utilitarianism uses to morally judge actions
T/F - Jeffrey Reiman and Jimmy Dore's view concerning the death penalty supports the idea that we should use the lex talionis principle as our guide to decide how we should punish criminals.
T/F - James Rachels argues that aid-in-dying is incompatible with the aims and purpose of medicine.
False (Callahan argues this)
T/F - Jimmy Dore argues that we should abolish the death penalty because it's barbaric, and it's motivated by a willingness to end life and a vengefulness in our culture and society. Therefore, because he argues we should make our culture and society less barbaric, less willing to end life, and less vengeful, his argument is similar to a virtue-ethics style argument
T/F - The AMA's view about euthanasia supports the idea that physicians are the only people who can appropriately play the role of executing murderers, and so the death penalty must be carried out by trained medical professionals only
T/F - Dennis Prager argues that if we evaluate the death penalty by focusing on the role-as-healer principle and only the role-as-healer principle, then we will recognize that the death penalty is morally warranted and it should not be abolished.
Other sets by this creator
INTB Module 4
Zanzot 1020 Exam 4
Biology 1020 Zanzot Final Exam
Biology Exam 3