Tuesday, March 29, 2005
About the Culture of Life
Some writers urge that we Americans adopt a "culture of life." Human life is precious, no matter what condition the person may be in. An unborn fetus has a life that is precious. An old opinionated geezer like me has a life that is precious. A patient in a nursing home with a severe brain injury has a life that is precious. And so on.
This argument makes me wonder, just what is it about life that makes it so precious? There are the pleasures of life: enjoying the company of loved ones; enjoying a good meal; enjoying beautiful music and other beautiful works of art; enjoying a good argument; and so on. These enjoyments have one thing in common: the ability to think, feel, and be aware of one's surroundings. If you take away my ability to think, to feel, to be aware of myself and my surroundings, you degrade me to the status of a vegetable. As a vegetable I can be fed, my body can carry out its functions, and so on, and I am not aware of what is going on any more that my favorite rose bush in my back yard is aware of its surroundings. I even imagine that if we humans have souls, the soul leaves the body when the body is no longer able to think. In my mind, the soul resides in the process of thinking.
Culture of life advocates have argued that abortion is wrong because it deprives a human of life. Removing the feeding tube of a brain-dead patient is wrong because it will cause the patient's death.
I think that a "culture of life" is a good idea, but it can be pushed too far and lead to absurd conclusions. If the patient had previously expressed a wish not to be kept alive indefinitely in a non-thinking condition, it is wrong not to honor that patient's wish. I do not oppose the practice of assisted suicide. Personally, I am a coward. If I knew I had a terminal illness that would put me in terrible pain for months before death, I would want the end to come before the terrible pain started.
I think that "culture of life" has to be fleshed out by a discussion and a general agreement on what constitutes life. I do not think that the brain-dead patient is "alive" for the purposes of an ideology of preserving life. I think that ascribing "life" to an unborn fetus can lead to a situation in which someone has to decide which life is more precious: that of the fetus or that of the mother.
Anyway, these are my thoughts. Any contrary opinions?
This argument makes me wonder, just what is it about life that makes it so precious? There are the pleasures of life: enjoying the company of loved ones; enjoying a good meal; enjoying beautiful music and other beautiful works of art; enjoying a good argument; and so on. These enjoyments have one thing in common: the ability to think, feel, and be aware of one's surroundings. If you take away my ability to think, to feel, to be aware of myself and my surroundings, you degrade me to the status of a vegetable. As a vegetable I can be fed, my body can carry out its functions, and so on, and I am not aware of what is going on any more that my favorite rose bush in my back yard is aware of its surroundings. I even imagine that if we humans have souls, the soul leaves the body when the body is no longer able to think. In my mind, the soul resides in the process of thinking.
Culture of life advocates have argued that abortion is wrong because it deprives a human of life. Removing the feeding tube of a brain-dead patient is wrong because it will cause the patient's death.
I think that a "culture of life" is a good idea, but it can be pushed too far and lead to absurd conclusions. If the patient had previously expressed a wish not to be kept alive indefinitely in a non-thinking condition, it is wrong not to honor that patient's wish. I do not oppose the practice of assisted suicide. Personally, I am a coward. If I knew I had a terminal illness that would put me in terrible pain for months before death, I would want the end to come before the terrible pain started.
I think that "culture of life" has to be fleshed out by a discussion and a general agreement on what constitutes life. I do not think that the brain-dead patient is "alive" for the purposes of an ideology of preserving life. I think that ascribing "life" to an unborn fetus can lead to a situation in which someone has to decide which life is more precious: that of the fetus or that of the mother.
Anyway, these are my thoughts. Any contrary opinions?
