Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
What We Argue About When We Argue About Death.
Aas, Sean.
Affiliation
  • Aas S; Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
J Med Philos ; 49(4): 399-413, 2024 Jul 11.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38708985
ABSTRACT
The literature on the determination of death has often if not always assumed that the concept of human death should be defined in terms of the end of the human organism. I argue that this broadly biological conceptualization of human death cannot constitute a basis for agreement in a pluralistic society characterized by a variety of reasonable views on the nature of our existence as embodied beings. Rather, following Robert Veatch, I suggest that we must define death in moralized terms, as the loss of an especially significant sort of moral standing. Departing from Veatch, however, I argue that we should not understand death in terms of the loss of all moral status whatsoever. Rather, I argue, what we should argue about, when we argue about death, is when and why people lose their rights-claims to the protection and promotion of their basic bodily functioning.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Philosophy, Medical / Death Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: J Med Philos Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Philosophy, Medical / Death Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: J Med Philos Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: United States