Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

To Die or Not to Die: A Kantian Perspective on Euthanasia

  • Published:
Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper attempts to explore the implications of Kant's moral criticism of suicide in the case of euthanasia. The paper argues that since Kant's criticism of suicide is essentially directed towards rational beings who are in full control of their rational faculty. It would hence not be applicable in case of individuals who are suffering from dementia and who have expressed a prior desire to be euthanized in such a scenario.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/euthanasia visited on 08/04/20.

  2. Marina Budic, ‘Suicide Euthanasia and the Duty to Die: A Kantian Approach to Euthanasia’, (2017) Philosophy and Society 29, 89. Also see generally, Hazel Biggs, Death with Dignity and the Law, (Hart Publishing 2001), Michael Cholbi (ed), Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: Global Views on Choosing to End Life (Praeger, 2017), Helga Kushe, Udo Schuklenk and others (ed), Bioethics an Anthology (3rd ed, Wiley Blackwell, 2016); Ora O’Neil, Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics, (CUP, 2002).

  3. Ibid90.

  4. Ibid90.

  5. Robert Young, Voluntary Euthanasia, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 Edition) Edward N Zalta (ed) at https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/voluntary/ visited on 08/04/20.

  6. cf Budic (note 2) 90.

  7. For example, in India, there were two forms of altruistic suicide- Jauhar and Sati. Jauhar or mass suicide, was practiced by women when their male counterparts were defeated in battle. Suicide in such situation was undertaken to avoid rape, enslavement and other retributions against them. In Sati, the wife would immolate herself on the funeral pyre of her husband. While sati is often justified on religious grounds, there is a possible economic angle to it as well. See generally, Lakshmi Vijay Kumar, “Altruistic Suicide in India’, 2010 Arch Suicide Res 8, 73–80.

  8. The ‘sanctity of life” theory as a prohibition against suicide can be found in the works of classical thinkers like Plato and Socrates. For Plato, the act of suicide represented the act of releasing our soul from our bodies. Suicide under religious heads were regarded as sins. For example, early and medieval Christianity also used religious precepts to prohibit suicide. For, example the often-quoted command from the Old Testament, “Thou shall not kill’, was taken to be forbidding self-destruction. Similar views can be found in Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. See generally, Michael Cholbi, Suicide, The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition) Edward N Zalta (ed) at https://plato.stanford.edu/artchives/fall2017/entries/suicide/ visited on 08/04/2020.

  9. The Greek philosopher Seneca believed that it was better to kill oneself than to live with failing capacities. For example in one of his works he observed “I will not abandon old age, if old age preserves me intact as regards the better part of myself; but if old age begins to shatter my mind, and to pull its various faculties to pieces, if it leaves me not life, but only the breath of life”. Seneca, “58th Letter to Lucilius,” trans. R. M. Gummere, in T. E. Page et al. (eds.).

  10. Mark Timmons, Moral Theory an Introduction (2nd edn, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2004) 2010.

  11. Young (note 5).

  12. Andrews Reath, Kant’s Conception of the Autonomy of the Will, in Oliver Sensen (eds), Kant on Moral Autonomy (Cambridge 2013) 33.

  13. Ibid.

  14. Ibid.

  15. Timmons (n 10) 207.

  16. Ibid.

  17. Ibid.

  18. The idea that dignity consist of the inherent worth of an individual is also commonly associated with the idea of human rights. All international human rights instruments endorse directly or indirectly the “inherent dignity’ of an individual as the source of human rights. However, for a contrary opinion see Oliver Sensen, who argues that Kantian dignity is based on the concept of dignity by which he means that it is not a distinct metaphysical property, that itself dignity is not a source of rights, and dignity is primarily about duties to oneself. Oliver Sensen, Kant on Human Dignity (2011 Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) 161.

  19. Christopher McCrudden, ‘Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights’(2008) 19 EJIL 655, 659.

  20. Ibid.

  21. See generally, Rachel Bayefsky, Dignity, Honour, and Human Rights: Kant's Perspective, (2013) 41 Political Theory 809, 816.

  22. Jeniffer. E. Bulcock, ‘How Kant would Chose to Die’ (Master’s Thesis, University of New Hampshire Durham, 2006).

  23. By hypothetical imperative Kant refers to all those external forces of causality that derives its validity as an object of desire, and therefore is of a conditional nature.

  24. Immanuel Kant, Lectures on Ethics, ed. Peter Heath and J.B. Schneewind. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 148.

  25. Ibid 144.

  26. Kerstein Samuel, Treating Persons as Means’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =  < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/persons-means/ > . Accessed on 22/09/20.

  27. For example, Kant observes “There is thus lodged in man an unlimited capacity that can be determined to operate in his nature through himself alone, and not through anything else in nature. This is freedom, and through it we may recognize the duty of self-preservation” Lectures (note 24) 144.

  28. Ibid 124.

  29. Rachel (note 21) 814.

  30. Rachel (note 21) 816–819.

  31. Lectures (n 24) 147.

  32. Ibid 149.

  33. Ibid 149.

  34. Ibid151.

  35. Yost, Benjamin S. “Kant’s Justification of the Death Penalty Reconsidered”, 2020 Kantian Review 15.

  36. Sharp, Robert, “The Dangers of Euthanasia and Dementia: How Kantian Thinking Might be used to Support non-voluntary euthanasia in cases of extreme dementia”, 2012 Bioethics 26, 231–235.

  37. Questions regarding capacity and consent and also those for determining at a what particular stage a person lose the capacity to make decisions for himself are mostly empirical enquiries. Existing laws on mental capacity presumes that a patient has the capacity to make decisions and that decisions taken by him with regard to his treatment (stopping) are taken in full understanding of the consequences. However, existing literature suggests this might not always be the case. See, Colin Gavaghan, Capacity and Assisted Dying in Michael Cholbi (ed), Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: Global Views on Choosing to End Life (2017 Praeger); S Natalie Banner, “Can Procedural and Substantive Elements of Decision- Making be Reconciled in Assessments of Mental Capacity?”(2013) International Journal of Law in Context 9, 71–86.

  38. Brassington Iain “Killing people: what Kant could have said about suicide and euthanasia but did not”, 2006 Journal of Medical Ethics 32, 571–574.; Dennis Cooley, “A Kantian Moral Duty for the Soon-to-be Demented to Commit Suicide”, (2007) AJOB 7, 37–44; Sharp, Robert, “The dangers of euthanasia and dementia: how Kantian thinking might be used to support non-voluntary euthanasia in cases of extreme dementia”, (Sharp 2012) Bioethics 26, 231– 235.

  39. Dennis Cooley, “A Kantian Moral Duty for the Soon-to-be Demented to Commit Suicide”, (2007) AJOB 7, 37–44.

  40. Sharp (note 50) 232.

  41. Cooley (note 54) 37–44.

  42. Ibid.

  43. Sharp (note 50) 234. For similar claims see Joshua Beckler, ‘Kantian Ethics: A Support for Euthanasia with Extreme Dementia’, 2012 CedarEthics Online 16.

  44. Sharp (note 50) 234. Kant’s duty of beneficence flows from his duty to others regarding their happiness. Kant regards such duties as imperfect duties or duties of commission. It includes the duty to cultivate the virtues of beneficence, gratitude and sympathy.

  45. Ibid 235–245.

  46. Cholbi, Michael (2014), “Kant on Euthanasia and the Duty to Die: Clearing the Air”, Journal of Medical Ethics, 2014 Bioethics 41, 607–610.

  47. Ibid 610.

  48. Ibid 609.

  49. Ibid 610.

  50. Ibid 610.

  51. Ibid 610.

  52. Sharp (note 50) 234.

  53. See Cholbi’s criticism against this line of thought. Cholbi (note 62) 609.

  54. Ibid.

  55. Ibid 607. Cholbi claims (in a footnote) that Cooley’s assumption of Kantian duty to die is also based on an erroneous reading of Kant. He argues that while Kant considers it heroic for someone to sacrifice herself to save her honor, the act still violates her humanity. Thus, disallowing the possibility of a duty to die.

  56. Rachel (note 27) 824, 25.

  57. Ibid.

References

  • Bayefsky, R. (2013). Dignity, honour, and human rights: Kant’s perspective. Political Theory, 41, 809–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckler, J. (2012). Kantian ethics: A support for euthanasia with extreme dementia. Cedar Ethics, 16, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brassington, I. (2006). Killing people: What Kant could have said about suicide and euthanasia but did not. Journal of Medical Ethics, 32, 571–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budic, M. (2017). Suicide euthanasia and the duty to die: A Kantian approach to Euthanasia. Philosophy and Society, 29, 88–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulcock, J. E. (2006). How Kant would chose to die. Master’s Thesis, University of New Hampshire Durham.

  • Cholbi, M. (2014). Kant on Euthanasia and the duty to die: Clearing the air. Journal of Medical Ethics, Bioethics, 41, 607–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cholbi, M. (Ed.). (2017). Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: Global Views on Choosing to End Life. Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cholbi, M. Suicide, The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition) E. N Zalta (Ed.). Visited on 08/04/2020. https://plato.stanford.edu/artchives/fall2017/entries/suicide/

  • Christopher, M. (2008). Human dignity and judicial interpretation of human rights. EJIL, 19, 655–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colin, G. (2017). Capacity and assisted dying. In M. Cholbi (Ed.), Euthanasia and assisted suicide: Global views on choosing to end life. Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, C. (2007). A Kantian moral duty for the soon-to-be demented to commit suicide. AJOB, 7, 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazel, B. (2001). Death with dignity and the law. Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helga, K., Schuklenk, U., et al. (ed). (2016). Bioethics an anthology (3rd ed.). Wiley Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Natalie Banner, S. (2013). Can procedural and substantive elements of decision-making be reconciled in assessments of mental capacity? International Journal of Law in Context, 9, 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neil, O. (2002). Autonomy and trust in bioethics. CUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sensen, O. (2011). Kant on human dignity. Deutsche Nationalbibliothek.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp, R. (2012). The dangers of euthanasia and dementia: How Kantian thinking might be used to support non-voluntary euthanasia in cases of extreme dementia. Bioethics, 26, 231–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmons, M. (2013). Moral Theory an Introduction (2nd ed.). Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vijay Kumar, L. (2004). Altruistic suicide in India. Archives of Suicide Research, 8, 73–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yost, B. S. (2010). Kant’s justification of the death penalty reconsidered. Kantian Review, 15, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. Voluntary Euthanasia, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 Edition). In E. N. Zalta (Ed). Visited on 08/04/20. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/voluntary/〹

Download references

Funding

The article was not funded.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Law, Navrachana University, Vadodara, 391410, India

    Navin Sinha

Authors
  1. Navin Sinha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Navin Sinha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

I hereby declare that I have not received any grant whatsoever in writing this research article. I declare that I have no conflict of interest of any kind.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sinha, N. To Die or Not to Die: A Kantian Perspective on Euthanasia. J. Indian Counc. Philos. Res. 39, 13–24 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-021-00265-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-021-00265-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation