domingo, 20 de noviembre de 2016

BioEdge: Is “sanctity of life” a useful concept?

BioEdge: Is “sanctity of life” a useful concept?
Bioedge
Is “sanctity of life” a useful concept?
- See more at: http://www.bioedge.org/bioethics/is-sanctity-of-life-a-useful-concept/12097#sthash.NK1g4VXs.dpuf
In increasingly heated debates over abortion and euthanasia, pro-lifers cling doggedly to the concept of “the sanctity of life”. This has been under attack for years by utilitarian philosophers, notably Princeton’s Peter Singer. In a 2005 article Singer went so far as to contend that “During the next 35 years, the traditional view of the sanctity of human life will collapse under pressure from scientific, technological, and demographic developments. By 2040, it may be that only a rump of hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalists will defend the view that every human life, from conception to death, is sacrosanct.”
You might think that Singer’s withering prediction would be countered with a robust defence by Catholic bioethicists. However, in a controversial article in The New Bioethics, David Albert Jones, director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre, in the UK, suggests that the term “sanctity of life” is so woolly that it should be scrapped. He says that Singer and others are attacking a straw man created by his buddies. “The connotations of this language are part of a deliberate attempt to distract from fundamental issues of justice, solidarity and human rights and falsely to imply that the legal protection which is due to vulnerable human beings is based only on religious sentiment.”
In a very interesting analysis of the term, Jones points out that Christian philosophers and theologians almost never used the term until the 1970s. It was only with the publication in 1957 of a book by Welsh legal scholar Glanville WilliamsThe Sanctity of Life and the Criminal Law, that it gained currency. And the aim of this author was to promote abortion and euthanasia and to attack Catholic views on bioethical issues. The books title was “an attempt to undermine the prohibition against killing the innocent in certain cases”.
Jones is a resolute foe of Singer and “quality of life” theorists. But he feels that “sanctity of life” leads people to think that opposition to abortion and euthanasia is based only on religious convictions. This is the tactic which has been used by Singer for years to discredit his opponents.
“It is better, in summary, to jettison the language of a ‘principle’ of ‘the sanctity of human life’ in favour of clearer and more traditional ethical concepts: the prohibition on killing the innocent and the prudential consideration of burdens and benefits, integrating distinct virtues and distinct practical principles in pursuit of the human good of the particular individual in the context medical treatment.”
- See more at: http://www.bioedge.org/bioethics/is-sanctity-of-life-a-useful-concept/12097#sthash.NK1g4VXs.dpuf
Bioedge
Bioedge
In 2005 Peter Singer confidently forecast the demise of the "sanctity of life" by 2040. His objections to the idea were mainly philosophical, but he cited two piece of evidence. One was the amazing success of a South Korean scientist named Hwang Woo-suk in creating embryonic stem cell lines. The other was the continuing advance of legal assisted suicide and euthanasia. 
Within months, Hwang Woo-suk was exposed as one of the greatest scientific frauds of the last century. As for euthanasia, Singer could still be right (although fears do persist that it could become, in his words, a "holocaust)". One out of two is not an impressive result and does little to inspire confidence in his prediction. 
But there is another problem with Singer's critique of the sanctity of life argument, as we report this week. A British bioethicist, David Albert Jones, director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre, points out that it was not Christians who "invented" the sanctity of life, but Singer and his cronies. In a very thought-provoking article in The New Bioethics, he says that "sanctity of life" is just a straw man set up to label discredit arguments against Singer's "quality of life" approach. It is a controversial thesis which deserves to be debated. 

Michael Cook
Editor
BioEdge
This week in BioEdge

by Michael Cook | Nov 20, 2016
Invented by Granville Williams, it is not an authentically Christian concept

by Michael Cook | Nov 20, 2016
Vote was watched around the world

by Michael Cook | Nov 20, 2016
Terminally ill, she wins right to try to live again

by Michael Cook | Nov 20, 2016
IVF advertising a "race to the bottom" targeting vulnerable people.

by Michael Cook | Nov 20, 2016
Regulations to new law could allow suicidal patients to commit suicide

by Xavier Symons | Nov 19, 2016
Researchers have used chimpanzees as models for human psychopathy.

by Xavier Symons | Nov 19, 2016
Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon says she would consider funding abortions for women from Northern Island.

by Xavier Symons | Nov 19, 2016
The debate surrounding marijuana in the US just got more complicated.

by Xavier Symons | Nov 19, 2016
Academics are calling on the Canadian government to monitor euthanasia.
BioEdge
Suite 12A, Level 2 | 5 George St | North Strathfield NSW 2137 | Australia
Phone: +61 2 8005 8605
Mobile: 0422-691-615
New Media Foundation | Level 2, 5 George St | North Strathfield NSW 2137 | AUSTRALIA | +61 2 8005 8605