Why Are Religious Reasons Dismissed? Euthanasia, Basic Goods, and Gratuitous Evil

Many proponents of euthanasia eschew appeals to religious premises as good reasons for thinking that human life has intrinsic worth. The reasons offered are that religious reasons do not meet some theory-neutral epistemic standard. My first argument is to show that pro-euthanasia arguments fail to m...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Napier, Stephen E. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Oxford University Press [2016]
In: Christian bioethics
Year: 2016, Volume: 22, Issue: 3, Pages: 276-300
IxTheo Classification:CB Christian life; spirituality
CH Christianity and Society
NCH Medical ethics
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1588454150
003 DE-627
005 20211102173041.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 190307s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1093/cb/cbw012  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1588454150 
035 |a (DE-576)518454150 
035 |a (DE-599)BSZ518454150 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1066620180  |0 (DE-627)817740287  |0 (DE-576)420613307  |4 aut  |a Napier, Stephen E. 
109 |a Napier, Stephen E.  |a Napier, Stephen 
245 1 0 |a Why Are Religious Reasons Dismissed? Euthanasia, Basic Goods, and Gratuitous Evil  |c Stephen Napier 
264 1 |c [2016] 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Many proponents of euthanasia eschew appeals to religious premises as good reasons for thinking that human life has intrinsic worth. The reasons offered are that religious reasons do not meet some theory-neutral epistemic standard. My first argument is to show that pro-euthanasia arguments fail to meet those same standards. In order to avoid this incoherence, the rejection of religious reasons is a function of thinking that such reasons are simply false. Arguing against religious belief has typically fallen to the evidential argument from evil. My second argument is to show that the argument from evil must hold to a basic goods account of human life. Such an account is contrary to the view of human life held by most euthanasia proponents. So, euthanasia proponents who reject religious belief on the basis of an argument from evil must hold to a contradictory view of human worth. One cannot both be a euthanasia proponent and reject arguments against euthanasia (that are based in part on religious premises). I explore ways to resolve this tension, but none save pro-euthanasia arguments. 
652 |a CB:CH:NCH 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Christian bioethics  |d Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1995  |g 22(2016), 3, Seite 276-300  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320433358  |w (DE-600)2004029-5  |w (DE-576)094085587  |x 1744-4195  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:22  |g year:2016  |g number:3  |g pages:276-300 
856 4 0 |u https://academic.oup.com/cb/article/22/3/276/2639548  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
856 |u https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbw012  |x doi  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3057805264 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1588454150 
LOK |0 005 20220208112911 
LOK |0 008 190307||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1550736558  |a NCH 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442043768  |a CB 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1550735845  |a CH 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw