PHI2600
Paper 2
Euthanasia is an important topic in applied ethics because it forces us
to think about autonomy, dignity, and how society should respond to serious
suffering. Many people argue that euthanasia should be allowed because
individuals should have the right to decide what happens to their own lives.
However, J. David Velleman disagrees with this approach. He argues that
euthanasia should not be defended mainly by appealing to personal choice.
In this paper, I will explain why J. David Velleman believes that euthanasia
should not be defended primarily for reasons of individual autonomy. I will
then present three possible problems with his view and explain which
objection I believe is the strongest.
Velleman’s main conclusion is that euthanasia should not be defended
on the reasons of individual autonomy. He argues that choosing death often
does not reflect genuine self-governance and can weaken respect for human
dignity. According to Velleman, the common claim that people have a right to
decide when to die relies on a limited understanding of autonomy.
Velleman explains that autonomy is not simply the ability to do
whatever one wants. Instead, it is a moral capacity connected to being a
rational individual who can shape and understand their life as a whole. From
a deontological perspective, people have basic value simply because they
are people. This value does not depend on whether someone is healthy,
independent, productive, or satisfied with their life. Because of this, Velleman
argues that respect for people requires more than honoring their
preferences.
One of Velleman’s key concerns is that many requests for euthanasia
come from a loss of perceived dignity rather than from fully autonomous
choice. People who are seriously ill or disabled may feel ashamed, useless, or
like a burden on their families or society. These feelings can weaken
