Balsa Wood Truss Bridge Designs

ABOUT legalizing euthanasia

It is ridiculous to run to death by disgust with life,

especially when death is made necessary by the kind of life we lead.

Epicurus

Roger Scruton

Sunday, November 20, 2010. The agency Crop poll reveals that 83% of Quebecers say they favor the legalization of euthanasia. Always those famous polls ... I wrote here a open letter to the Special Commission on the issue of dying with dignity is remained, as expected, a dead letter. I predict in my letter that said Commission will rule in favor of legalizing euthanasia. The survey precedes the hearse where rests the body of Article 241 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

However, in the course of my readings, I came across a remarkable text by the philosopher Roger Scruton, "Dying Quietly." (1) I thought at first to reach the Comission since it is only a very small text, but dense, very dense, which - I thought - still did not kill person.

They counted on the fingers of one hand the authors on the subject, do not repeat ad nauseam what is found elsewhere and which are actually fueling the polls. The British philosopher, well known for his "conservative" in art as in politics, takes a unique look at the question that bothers us so much now. Whether or not one agrees with his positions "right", "Quietly Dying" is a gem of philosophy and deserves a slow and meditative reading. At the outset, I announce that it is no question me to do the summary. However, to whet your appetite, I want to comment on one or two points of particular signifiers.

First, faced with clear cases of unspeakable suffering in end of life, our minds - that probe the polls - sanctions, without hesitation, a "utilitarian". More specifically, the vast majority of us - not only in Quebec but also elsewhere, in all liberal democracies in good part - taking a position "liberal", that is to say that law must be neutral on the various conceptions of the good life being adopted by citizens. Thus, in the case of suicide-assisted, Article 241 of the Criminal Code of Canada is seen by many of us as being discriminatory because the article goes against the right to freedom of conscience and belief enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Also, at this state of things, many in favor of the abolition of Article 241 advocate a "cost-benefit analysis, invoice clearly utilitarian, in favor of euthanasia.

The analysis handler type "cost-benefit" may seem perfectly justified in the case of euthanasia. Please note, however, warns us Scruton, since a big risk in the long term by marrying such an analysis. Indeed, the abolition of Article 241,

... O Will changes collective perception of death. It Will instilling a habit of calculation WHERE Previously only absolutes guided o conduite; and in general it Will Make Both Death and Dying Easier to Deal With and Easier to Bring about. (p. 68)

One might object that evokes Scruton a scarecrow, in this case the fallacy of the slippery slope. Maybe. However, argue that the only consequences are those provided by the cost-benefit analysis - basically, the patient is relieved and his family - is to demonstrate a serious naivete, if not a total blindness.

In sum, says Scruton, the utilitarian and liberal which we seem to agree then reconfigure considerably long term the meaning we give to life and death. However, traditionally, philosophy seeks to understand the meaning of things, including death that guides our lives. Scruton writes:

The task of philosophy to discover a meaning-IS in death, and to drift From That Meaning Some guidance as to how We Might Live o Mortality and Cease To Despair At The Thought of It.

We no longer accept death as an integral part of life, "said Scruton.

"The First Things That philosophy has IS Likely to remark upon That Is The great difference exists, a Society in Which Between Death Is Accepted and Duly catered for the dead, and one in Which Death Is taboo and the dead could out mind. (p. 72-73)

Scruton raises the prospect of "first person" distinct from the "third person". My death is always that of another, never mine, creating the illusion of the absence of death. Medical science and its spectacular advances reinforce this illusion.

Scruton does not address it, but the illusion in question is produced by the "I" First Person. The illusion of the current absence of death, that of "I" was reinforced - if not all created Parts-by what philosophers call "modernity" and the advent of the "subject". We design in effect the world around us in the third person as well as our own death, never the first person for whom death is inconceivable. Science describes the universe and what we are, biologically and physically always in the third person. This is the "he" or "him" suffering, deteriorating and dying, not "me" "I" has the final authority that "it" must cease to exist. We are dualists like Descartes was the father of modern philosophy. Science, as the author dreamed of Discourse on Method, we promised happiness, that is to say, among other things, deliver us from death. But the long-awaited Messiah does not always point in the distance.

Despite dramatic advances that prolong life, medical science is powerless to obtain immortality, so that death is always lurking, ready to strike without striking a blow. The wisdom of the religions of Christianity in particular, urges us to worry about death now. For his part, philosophy, Montaigne in mind, we invite philosophize is to learn to say die. Or, give meaning to life and death is learning to die.

What then do we give meaning to death today? It is primarily an event that is not part of life, which belongs to the prospect of the third person, "he" and not "I". It is inconceivable that "I" dies. It is intolerable that "he" suffers. The right to die would, in short, the law respecting the dictates of the "I". The illusion of "I" command so the illusory right to death.

As seen, Scruton is not an avid follower of the right to die. His arguments seem convincing, although qu'utilitaristes in their bill - which he also denounced. There was one who joined me in particular, that concerning the love which escapes me, apparently it, the charge of being utilitarian as it concerns the virtue of love. Scruton writes:

We Should not allow to The Law shield us from our mortality, Gold From The fragility Without Which We Could Hardly be loved. (p. 77)

What does this mean? Human love is the only real "cure" at the loss, degeneration and death. Prolonging life, as medical science leads us there, we could end up in worse than death, namely " The Living Death of the loveless . (P. 76). By putting everything in the hands of science and law, we run the risk of sacrifice, by depriving it of its meaning, the love between humans. There is no question that some people who call for their immediate euthanasia do not like them. It's not about that. The question is to amend the legislation, which may change our conception of love in the near end of life. Scruton apprehends that the legalization of euthanasia or assisted suicide, has serious consequences and thereafter on the condition that we show vis-à-vis our loved ones end of life. Dying with dignity is first and foremost, to die knowing that we are highly valuable in the eyes of our loved ones. Beloved beyond death, and despite it, that is beautiful and great. (Think of love and has testified as further evidence Chloé Sainte-Marie Gilles Carle. The Quebec government should honor its great virtue by helping more helpers-natural. ") That's love . It is stronger than death. That is sublime, sacred.

Without realizing expressly Scruton calls made by these old theological virtues are faith, hope and charity, that we - wrongly, in my opinion - banned Affairs the city where modern science is now the top of the podium. It reflects either the Greek word agape by charity or love. Saint Paul writes: "When I faith (pistin) the fullest, one that moves mountains, if I miss the love (or charity) (agapèn) I'm nothing . "(1 Corinthians 13 2). That is why Thomas Aquinas is the agape - charity or love - the theological virtue par excellence, superior to the other two, and in this account, saying all the cardinal virtues. , (2)

Socrates said that what matters is not live but live well. (3) If Thomas Aquinas, taking St. Paul, right, so if I did not grow at During my life, love (or charity), I am the most despicable people and my life has little value. In this case, the death appear to me as the worst of calamities. But faced with such terrible agonies of dying, I claim, in desperation, the right to die - a bit like those unfortunates who, September 11, 2001, had no choice but to rush the Top of the Twin Towers. Instead, if I have grown to love (agape ), then I have lived and death or end of life might undermine in any way under the hard-won.

NOTES


(1) Roger Scruton, A Political Philosophy . Arguments for Conservatism , Continuum, 2006, Chapter 4, p. 64-80.
(2) Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica , 2AE-2, Question 4, Article 3.
(3) Plato, Crito , 48b.