Euthanasia and Kantian Ethics
Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who believed in a particular way of approaching ethics. He followed two 'laws' when deciding what to do in a moral dilemma. Firstly, he believed that one should only follow a maxim that you would be happy to be universalised and used to approach every ethical situation. For example such a maxim could be 'do not kill' in which case Kant argues that in order to follow this principle you should be content with the idea that to decide how to act in every ethical dilemma you simply need to follow the rule that you must not kill. However in modern day society we know that it is not always in your best interest to follow such a maxim, for example in the circumstance where you have to kill one person to save the life of many others. In addition to this, Kant also supported the idea that we should treat people 'as ends and never as means to an end only'. This means that each person has the right to live and the right to their own choices, and that we should not use other people without their consent even if it is for the greater good.
When trying to apply Kant's ethical ideas to Euthanasia, one can immediately see that it is difficult to come to a clear decision on whether it should be morally allowed. Firstly one would have to decide on a maxim to approach Euthanasia with. For the purposes of this site, let us take two very contrasting maxims. These are:
In conclusion, it is very difficult to use Kantian ethics to solve the issue of Euthanasia. Although it can be used to argue against the legalisation of Euthanasia, it is easy for somebody to change the maxim used for this argument thus making Kantian ethics support Euthanasia. In the end it all comes down to which maxim you use, as as long as it can be universalised it can be used to encourage or discourage euthanasia. In terms of Kant himself, he would have probably been anti-Euthanasia as he feels too strongly that every life is a valuable end and therefore no-one has the right to forcefully finish it before the time is right.
Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who believed in a particular way of approaching ethics. He followed two 'laws' when deciding what to do in a moral dilemma. Firstly, he believed that one should only follow a maxim that you would be happy to be universalised and used to approach every ethical situation. For example such a maxim could be 'do not kill' in which case Kant argues that in order to follow this principle you should be content with the idea that to decide how to act in every ethical dilemma you simply need to follow the rule that you must not kill. However in modern day society we know that it is not always in your best interest to follow such a maxim, for example in the circumstance where you have to kill one person to save the life of many others. In addition to this, Kant also supported the idea that we should treat people 'as ends and never as means to an end only'. This means that each person has the right to live and the right to their own choices, and that we should not use other people without their consent even if it is for the greater good.
When trying to apply Kant's ethical ideas to Euthanasia, one can immediately see that it is difficult to come to a clear decision on whether it should be morally allowed. Firstly one would have to decide on a maxim to approach Euthanasia with. For the purposes of this site, let us take two very contrasting maxims. These are:
- 'Do Not Kill' If we assume that this is the maxim with which someone approaches Euthanasia, then it is clearly not morally acceptable. It is possible to universalise this law, as when approaching all cases of euthanasia, suicide or even murder the ending of another persons life would be seen as ethically wrong, which is plausible. Therefore, one could use this maxim with Kantian ethics and argue that Euthanasia is wrong in all circumstances.
- Having said this, if one uses an entirely different maxim to approach Euthanasia, Kantian ethics can be used to support it. For example if your maxim is 'a person should be allowed to end their life if under a huge amount of suffering that can not be cured or has a terminal illness' and we universalise this law, it can be used to approach all cases of euthanasia and support that it is morally acceptable. It is clearly saying that a person should only be killed if they choose to do so and if it is agreed there is no other way to cure them, there seems to be no negative effects of universalising this law.
In conclusion, it is very difficult to use Kantian ethics to solve the issue of Euthanasia. Although it can be used to argue against the legalisation of Euthanasia, it is easy for somebody to change the maxim used for this argument thus making Kantian ethics support Euthanasia. In the end it all comes down to which maxim you use, as as long as it can be universalised it can be used to encourage or discourage euthanasia. In terms of Kant himself, he would have probably been anti-Euthanasia as he feels too strongly that every life is a valuable end and therefore no-one has the right to forcefully finish it before the time is right.