Quote (Handcuffs @ 29 Jan 2023 08:41)
This subforum has been more political than philosophical over the past several yeas, but I know there's some wicked smart and well-read people in our regulars. So:
Assisted suicide conversations/debate have largely surrounded the utility of such practices in the event of terminal illness of the body; however, I contend that from a existential lens (specifically, Albert Camus' work) that suicide is indeed the one true philosophical question within a meaningless universe/existence and that humanity should operate assisted suicide as a standard practice irrespective of whether one has a terminal illness or not (besides, the fact that we are all mortal means that existence itself is a terminal condition). People should not be forced to feel like they need to die in horrifically painful and lonely ways, and that should someone independently decide that they no longer wish to be conscious in a meaningless world, then they exercise one of the greatest arguments for free will: Nobody, and no entity, can force you to experience conscious existence. It should, of course, operate under regulation; however, laws against suicide/assisted suicide are deeply absurd in their reluctance to acknowledge that suicide/assisted suicide is neither moral nor immoral, but amoral.
Thoughts, contentions, ridicule? What say you, PaRD?
philosophically and on principle i agree 100%.
the problem i see is legal implementation and decisionmaking concerning something i assume we all consider a necessary requirement: the mental capacity to make that decision.
how should we treat mentally challenged / impaired people, alzheimer patients, clinically depressed people...? i assume your "regulation" would include some kind of professional assessment of one's mental state?
This post was edited by fender on Jan 29 2023 04:30am