Od eutanazie k infanticidě

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
[From Euthanasia to Infanticide] The paper revisits the recent controversy over Dr. Mitlőhner’s defense of infanticide, published in this journal. In section 1, I point out the weaknesses of Mitlőhner’s paper. In sections 2 and 3 I turn to the most sophisticated defense of infanticide on offer today, that of Peter Singer’s. Section 2 sums up Singer’s description of the medical practice as already having abandoned the traditional ethic of equal value of all human lives, which motivates ethical revisionism. However, an explicit justification of a revision is necessary. This is the job of Singer’s Replacement Argument, examined in section 3. I argue that this justification of infanticide in completely impersonal terms fails. In section 4, I reject it in favor of Ronald Dworkin’s distinction between experiential interests, possessed by infants, and critical interests that develop later. Hence, neonatal euthanasia can sometimes be justified in terms of a newborn‘s own interests (presumably, to relieve its suffering), not in impersonal terms. The only exception is those infants that lack any capacity for cognitive activity whatsoever, and who thus lack even experiential interests. It is an open question whether their “life” differs from death, and whether by killing them we perform infanticide.
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-07-24
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
89 ( #34,233 of 48,922 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
45 ( #15,027 of 48,922 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.