Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Continuing to live can impose sufficiently great burdens ... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→A person may have a duty to die in order to relieve family members or loved ones of burdens imposed by that person's continued living.

    Continuing to live can impose sufficiently great burdens on family members or loved ones.

    Afterlife & Death
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Afterlife & Death

    Related

    A person may have a duty to die in order to relieve family members or loved ones...Fairness requires that a person not impose unreasonable burdens on others.When the burdens imposed on others by continuing to live are sufficiently great,...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Afterlife & Death
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A person may have a duty to die in order to relieve family members or ...81%When the burdens imposed on others by continuing to live are sufficien...76%Well-being does not completely depend on the goods of this life.74%One's well-being does not completely depend on the goods of this life.73%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: suicide
    View source passageHide passage
    However, the thesis that there may exist a “duty to die” need not be defended by appeal to overtly consequentialist or utilitarian reasoning. In the course of articulating what he terms a “family-centered” approach to bioethics, the philosopher John Hardwig (1996, 1997) has argued that sometimes the burdens that a person imposes on others, particularly on family members or loved ones, by continuing to live are sufficiently great that one may have a duty to die in order to relieve them of these b

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective