Question

Explain in detail Gay-Williams’ three arguments against euthanasia. What is his argument why passive euthanasia should not be considered euthanasia? What are two of Rachels' objections to the distinction between passive and active euthanasia?

Answer 1

Answer:
Three arguments are:
1.   Argument from Nature:

1. euthanasia is not according human nature.
2. It denied the dignity of human.
3. If it denied the dignity of human then it is wrong on the basis of morality.
4. Therefore, it is wrong morally.

2.   Argument from Self-Interest:

1. It consist chance of that one will take action his own will.
2. If it happens then acts of euthanasia is wrong on the basis of morality.
3. Hence, it is a wrong act.
3.   Argument from Practical Effects:
1.it may corrupt g nurses and doctors
2. If (1), then it is morally wrong act
3. Hence, it is morally wrong on the basis of morality.

•   He rejects the act of passive euthanasia on the basis of that it is killing nature of euthanasia, not letting die.

•   According to Rachel there is no difference between letting die and active killing. Hence, there is no differences between active and passive euthanasia.

Rachel argue that if there is no basic difference between active and passive euthanasia then passive is worse because it causes more suffering.