Phil 165 Study Questions for the Final Exam-2

Phil 165 Study Questions for the Final Exam-2 - Phil...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Phil 165 (Bioethics) 1 st Summer Session 2008 Study Questions for the Final Exam The following are study questions for the final exam (scheduled from 11:30-2:30 on Monday, June 16). The exam will consist of three short answer questions (each worth 10 points) for a total of 30 points. All the questions on the exam will be pulled from the following list. Short-Answer Questions 1) According to Daniel Callahan in “When Self-Determination Runs Amok”, what “slippery-slope” occurs when one allows voluntary active euthanasia on the grounds of (1) a right to self-determination and (2) the obligation of doctors to be merciful to their patients? Explain. According to Callahan a slippery slope occurs when one allows voluntary active euthanasia. Once euthanasia is allowed to relieve people from their pain, it would seem that it would be immoral and cruel as well to deny someone a lethal dose merely because they are incompetent. Thus it seems that doctors would soon be obliged to be merciful to their patients even if they were incompetent. Thus would lead to non-voluntary euthanasia. Also, allowing euthanasia would lead to this seemingly limitless right to self-determination. If one allows euthanasia it seems that one would also have a right to be helped by physicians in their suicide. Pain and suffering are such subjective feelings and once you allow euthanasia you create a slippery slope and many other things could easily be justified. 2) According to John Lachs in “When Abstract Moralizing Runs Amok”, is the practice of medicine value-free? Explain. 3) According to J. David Velleman in “Against the Right to Die”, how can having the option of euthanasia be worse for someone than not having that option? Having the option of euthanasia can in fact be worse than not having the option according to Vellemen. In his article, Regan argues that sometimes giving someone the option may not be in their best interest. New options make it impossible to obtain the status quo without having to choose it. For example, an unwanted party invitation which you receive gives you knew options you previously would not have had. Your best option now is to attend the party, as you can no longer avoid the person by default. While staying away by default was your best option, after receiving the invitation you are no longer able to do this. Therefore, giving people options is not always better than not having the option.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
4) According to Ronald Dworkin in the selection entitled “Life Past Reason”, why are autonomy demands not “necessarily contemporary”? (Referencing the Jehovah’s Witness case here might help you.) Autonomy demands are not necessarily contemporary according to the integrity model of autonomy which Dworkin favors. The Jehovah’s Witness case consists of a person whom signed a formal document declaring they do not wish to receive
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 4

Phil 165 Study Questions for the Final Exam-2 - Phil...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online