Keyboard Shortcuts?

×
  • →Next step
  • ←Previous step
  • ↓Skip this slide
  • ↑Previous slide
  • mShow slide thumbnails
  • nShow notes
  • hShow handout latex source
  • NShow talk notes latex source

Click here and press the right key for the next slide (or swipe left)

also ...

Press the left key to go backwards (or swipe right)

Press n to toggle whether notes are shown (or add '?notes' to the url before the #)

Press m or double tap to slide thumbnails (menu)

Press ? at any time to show the keyboard shortcuts

 

An Inalienable Right to Life

1. In order for me to kill myself, I must renounce my right to life.

[\emph{Aside}: The notion of a right that we’re discussing here is also relevant to the Responsibility for Global Poverty theme from earlier lectures: recall that \citet{pogge:2005_world}’s argument hinges on the idea that poor people’s human rights are being violated.]

An entitlement ‘not to be killed or allowed to diecan be claimed against all other private individuals and groups forforbearance and performance, and against the state for its enforcement’ (Feinberg, 1978 p. 103).

‘Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states’ \citep{wenar:2020_rights}.
So your right to life is an entitlement you have to live. What does this amount to?
‘by "the right to life" we can mean a right not to be killed or allowed to die which can be claimed against all other private individuals and groups for their forbearance and performance, and against the state for its enforcement’ \citep[p.~103]{feinberg:1978_voluntary}.

human right?

What does it mean to say that this is a human right? ‘The right to life, as I shall understand it here, also belongs to that subclass of moral rights that are said, in virtue of their fundamentally important, indeed essential, connection with human well-being, to belong equally and unconditionally to all human beings, simply in virtue of their being human. It is, therefore, what the United Nations called a human right.’ \citep[p.~97]{feinberg:1978_voluntary}.

claim right

Anything else I need to know?
‘The right to life [...] is generally thought, at least in our time, to be \emph{a claim-right} as opposed to a right in the sense of mere liberty, privilege, or absence of duty to refrain ... A claim-right [...] is a liberty correlated with another person's duty (or all other persons' duties) not to interfere.’ \citep[p.~95]{feinberg:1978_voluntary}.

1. In order for me to kill myself, I must renounce my right to life.

But:

2. The right to life is inalienable.

Inalienable right: You cannot surrender, transfer or voluntarily give it up.
Note that saying a right is inalienable is not the same thing as saying that it cannot be forfeitted. It is logically consistent to combine the view that all humans have an inalienable right to life with the view that those who kill others thereby forfeit their rights to life.

Therefore:

3. I cannot rightly renounce my right to life.

Therefore:

4. Therefore I cannot rightly kill myself, nor may you help.

‘how could my suicide violate my own right to life? Is that right a claim against myself as well as against others? Do I treat myself unjustly if I deliberately end my life for what seem to me the best reasons?’ \citep[p.~119]{feinberg:1978_voluntary}.
Apparently Aquinas thought the idea that suicide violated a person’s own rights was incoherent.
\citep{cholbi:2017_suicide} comments on this argument: ‘It is at least possible that no one has the right to determine the circumstances of a person’s death!’

1. The right to life is discretionary, not mandatory.

A ‘\emph{mandatory right} confers no discretion whatever on its possessor: only one way of exercising it is permitted. It leaves one path open to him but no genuine "option" between paths. It imposes a correlative duty on others to provide that path and leave it unobstructed [...]. If I have a mandatory right to do X then it follows logically that I have [...] a duty to do X. In the case of mandatory rights, duty and right are entirely coincident.’ \citep[p.~105]{feinberg:1978_voluntary}.
‘Any discretionary right to something is a right to take it or leave it, as one chooses’ \citep[p.~105]{feinberg:1978_voluntary}.
Plausible examples of mandatory rights: the right of a child to education; the right of a citizen to serve as a juror.
‘I have a \emph{discretionary right} in respect to X when I have an open option to X or not to X correlated with the duties of others not to interfere with my choice’ \citep[p.~105]{feinberg:1978_voluntary}.
Property rights (if they exist) are plausibly discretionary rights.

Therefore:

2. In suicide I am exercising the right, not renouncing it.

What is being rejected if the right side is true?

Never trust a philosopher

‘Another way in which people frequently articulate their opposition to killing is to claim that it violates the victim’s right to life.

But, as many rights theorists have pointed out, rights can be waived.

Look, no citations! Sure sign of ignorance.

[...] Hence suicide and voluntary euthanasia cannot be objectionable on the ground that they violate the right to life’

\citep[.~464]{mcmahan:2002_ethics}.
Note that McMahan misrepresents ‘rights theorists’ (clue: he gives no citations) and appears unaware of the (elementary) distinction between mandatory and discretionary rights.

McMahan, 2002 p. 464

Never trust a philosopher

‘Another way in which people frequently articulate their opposition to killing is to claim that it violates the victim’s right to life.

But, as many rights theorists have pointed out, rights can be waived.

[...] Hence suicide and voluntary euthanasia cannot be objectionable on the ground that they violate the right to life’

McMahan, 2002 p. 464

Is the right to life discretionary or mandatory?

Feinberg: ‘paternalist’

Unlike Feinberg, do not mistake an insult for an argument!