Critique of James Rachels's Defense of Euthanasia

The researcher believes that James Rachels's defense of active euthanasia deserves a critical and normative analysis because of its dehumanizing consequences. The researcher demonstrates that Rachels's position is conceptually, theoretically, practically, and normatively unjustifiable. The researcher concludes that Rachels's categorization of active and passive euthanasia into killing and letting die is a false dichotomy. The researcher argues throughout the research that the third and the only choice is to stop prolongation of death by advanced medical technology and permitting termination of extraordinary medical care from dying person by following legitimate procedures.

Autorentext

Mohammad Manzoor Malik ist Dozent an der Fakultät für Philosophie und Religion der Assumption University of Thailand mit den Schwerpunkten Geschichte der Philosophie, Islamwissenschaft, islamische Rechtsprechung, Hermeneutik, Philosophie des Geistes und Religionsphilosophie.

Klappentext

The researcher believes that James Rachels's defense of active euthanasia deserves a critical and normative analysis because of its dehumanizing consequences. The researcher demonstrates that Rachels's position is conceptually, theoretically, practically, and normatively unjustifiable. The researcher concludes that Rachels's categorization of active and passive euthanasia into killing and letting die is a false dichotomy. The researcher argues throughout the research that the third and the only choice is to stop prolongation of death by advanced medical technology and permitting termination of extraordinary medical care from dying person by following legitimate procedures.