The Ethics of Medical Homicide and MutilationO'Malley, Austin
Religion
The Ethics of Medical Homicide and Mutilation
O'Malley, Austin
Medical ethics
A Discussion of euthanasia through the use of narcotics in cases of
incurable diseases periodically recurs, and the opinions of those in
favor of putting the patient out of his misery are expressions of
mere sentimentality, as in Maeterlinck's essay, _Our Eternity_. They
think either that the passing of a law by a legislature removes all
moral difficulty, or that morality is a trifle which should never
stand in the way of expediency. Those who oppose this method of
euthanasia base their argument, first, on the fact that many patients
supposed by even clever diagnosticians to be incurable recover
health; and, secondly, on the fact that the giving power of life and
death to physicians is liable to grave abuse. This side misses the
central truth and argues from accidental and secondary premises.
Whether it is expedient, humane, or impolitic to kill incurable
patients are almost irrelevant considerations: the fundamental
question to be answered here is, Is there a Supreme Being who alone
is master of life, to give it or to take it?
By its very definition such a Being is necessary (as opposed to
contingent), self-existent; its essence always has been and always
will be actualized into existence, and that from itself alone; it is
an individual substance of an intelligent nature, and therefore a
person. A contingent being is one that happens to be (_contingere_);
it is of necessity neither existent nor non-existent; it has no
logical aversion to existence, but in itself it has no more than
a possibility of actuality. A necessary Being, on the contrary,
essentially must be; it cannot not be; it is absolutely and
essentially its own existence.
There must be such a Necessary Being. If there were not, all things
would be contingent, which is an absurdity. The absurdity arises
from the fact that if all things were contingent nothing would be
actual, nothing could ever come into existence, because there would
be nothing to bring the primitive potentiality of the contingent
beings into actual existence. The sufficient reason for the existence
of contingent beings is either in themselves or in something outside
themselves. It cannot be in themselves, because as they do not yet
exist they are nothing; therefore it is in a Being which is not
contingent, but whatever is not contingent is necessary. Therefore
the existence of contingent beings absolutely requires the existence
of a Necessary Being, which always was in existence. The ordinary
name for this Necessary Being is God. Contingent beings are all
creatures, all organic and inorganic beings without exception. There
is, then, a God, the first cause or creator of all contingent beings,
among whom is man; and since God created man wholly, this creature is
wholly subservient to God, under the dominion of God, and his life is
owned solely by God; God alone is the master of life and death, and
he alone can delegate such mastery.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account