Ethics

Philo 171
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 LOPEGA Questions for the Third Exam

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
jimenez



Posts : 70
Join date : 2008-11-25

PostSubject: LOPEGA Questions for the Third Exam   Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:47 pm

Lopega
Lopega
1. In those cases where Jack Kevorkian performed assisted euthanasia on patients confirmed to be terminally ill and who were fully autonomous in seeking euthanasia, was Jack Kevorkian's action morally excusable? Why or why not.

2. After careful considerations of the various ethical theories/views we discussed, what “personal moral system or code” can you come up with and which you can adopt? Be sure to talk about the values, precepts/ideas, and other elements that should comprise this “personal moral system or code”. Include your conception of freedom and accountability in this given moral system and your view of what it means to be a moral individual.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
LOPEGA



Posts : 6
Join date : 2008-11-24

PostSubject: Final Exam   Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:03 pm

1. In those cases where Jack Kevorkian performed assisted euthanasia on patients confirmed to be terminally ill and who were fully autonomous in seeking euthanasia, was Jack Kevorkian's action morally excusable? Why or why not.
“No one is truly free to live until one is free to die”. Martin Luther King
Dr. Kevorkian, I believe is just an assistant to the death of the people who committed “suicide”. He did not kill them. It was the patients who killed themselves. The main point here is the autonomy of those individuals who sought his help. For one thing, those persons are rational beings who can decide for themselves. They have the autonomy to live the way of life they wanted and to deal with things that is part of our lives, even their time and way of death, if given the opportunity (as opposed to death caused by accidents). And what Dr.Kevorkian did, was a respect of the autonomy of those patients. His actions, when it comes to the issue on assistant suicide, is morally excusable. It is because, one, his actions, in utilitarian point of view, was morally right. He helped end the life of people who were terminally ill. Those people were suffering and decided to end their pain and agony. Due to the assistance of Dr. Kevorkian , these people died peacefully and painlessly, compared to the kind of painful natural death, emotionally, physically and psychologically, to the patients, they would have experienced due to their diseases. The outcome of his actions were therefore moral because it was for the benefit of the patients. They died peacefully and painlessly while maintaining their dignity.
If some of the patients my not be terminally ill, but they want to live a life to the fullest, yet they can’t, for whatever reason, and thus they decided that living a life in a way they did not want is worse than death then so be it. They have the free will to decide what they want. And it is not something which is immoral.
Dr. Kevorkian did not threaten, influenced or subjected the patients to the death machine without their consent. An action with the consent of both parties is moral. It was his patients who chose death. Dr. Kevorkain did not decide for these people, he was merely an instrument to the realization of the decisions of those patients. And patients, even if they are terminally ill have the right to know their condition, to chose the treatment they want, and to chose whether they want to prolong their life or not. Just like the patients of Dr, Kevorkian, they have the power and the autonomy to decide and to choose. On the first place, they could have decided to choose not to end their life with the assistant of Dr, Kevorkian, and I’m quite sure the Dr. would have respected their decisions. However, they decided the other way around so Dr. Kevorkian likewise, just respected their decisions.



2. After careful considerations of the various ethical theories/views we discussed, what “personal moral system or code” can you come up with and which you can adopt? Be sure to talk about the values, precepts/ideas, and other elements that should comprise this “personal moral system or code”. Include your conception of freedom and accountability in this given moral system and your view of what it means to be a moral individual.



In my “personal moral system”, morality is based on the motive of your actions and the end result of your actions.
Your goal, consequence or the end result of your action is still important, to decide whether it is right morally or not. But you should think that if the world will do the same and the result would be the same, will there be no societal breakdown? Is it possible? If yes, then your action is moral. Your motives, on the first place should be right. And consequently the end result should be right. So it should be that both the motives of your action and the end result of your action are morally right for you to be a moral individual. It is morally right if you did not harm anyone, you respected other people and you are responsible of your action. You actions and motives likewise, is something that you like and that it makes you happy (in its diverse and various senses of being happy). It is because, sometimes, your motive is moral but the end result is not or sometimes your motives were immoral yet the outcome was morally right, that both the motive and the consequence is imprtant. Such motives or actions are not something that is imposed to you by an external agent. You have still the choice to choose your motives and your actions as long as it follows above mentioned criteria.

You have freedom if you (1) have the autonomy to decide whatever you want for you life, but you have to think of the criteria mentioned above. (2)You still have the free will to deal, whatever way you want, with the ways of life (even death) thus control your “destiny”. You can be what you want to be and do what you choose to do. All of these is a manifestation of freedom. Accountability has something to do with freedom. Since you have the freedom to choose and to decide, you must define your own life, thus you are accountable of your self-definition. Nature or your genes does not necessarily have to define you as a person but you have the power to use either genes or nature (e.g. experiences), and any other things, for that matter, to mold you into the person that you want to be.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
 
LOPEGA Questions for the Third Exam
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Exam Questions gone Wrong
» mark 3 questions
» Horus Questions
» Newbie Questions
» You have questions, we try to have answers

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Ethics :: Philo 171 B :: Third EXAM-
Jump to: