Peter Singer & the "Quality of Life" Ethic (was Re: Replying toMarta...)
furuhashi.1 at SPAMosu.edu
Sat Dec 9 13:57:40 MST 2000
>On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:10:19 +1000 Gary MacLennan
><g.maclennan at qut.edu.au> writes:
> > Your reply to
> > Macdonald pain and death was exactly what my friends who believe in
>> the"sanctity of life" tell me.
>As I am sure that you are well-aware, that your fellow Aussie, the
>philosopher Peter Singer has writing critiques of the "sancity of
>life" as that
>notion has been handed down to us from the Judeo-Christian tradition,
>arguing that this notion provides a poor basis for resolving issues
>of medical ethics. Singer, of course writes from the standpoint
>of a utilitarian liberal, so it might be of interest sometime to
>discuss here, how Marxists would critique both the ethics
>of the "sanctity of life" and the proposed alternatives to it
>that have been offered by people such as SInger.
On LBO-talk, Jim, Marta, yours truly, & various other posters debated
the question of Peter Singer & the "quality of life" ethic. Those
who are interested in the subject should visit
<http://nuance.dhs.org/lbo-talk/0003/subject.html#184> to find the
discussion (look for posts on "Peter Singer & Vegetarian Dogs"). I'm
critical of Peter Singer, for reasons that I explained there. My
objections to Singer are based upon my objections to both Kant & Mill.
Has anyone read Marx's thoughts on suicides?
More information about the Marxism