Applied Ethics: Issues of Life and Death – CUET PG Philosophy – Notes

Applied Ethics: An Introduction

Applied ethics is a branch of philosophy that deals with the practical application of moral considerations. It is ethics with its sleeves rolled up, moving from the abstract realm of theory to the concrete moral dilemmas people face in their daily lives and in professional contexts. While Normative Ethics asks “What makes actions right or wrong?” and Meta-ethics asks “What is the nature of morality itself?”, Applied Ethics asks “How do we apply ethical principles to specific, controversial issues?”. This field addresses real-world problems, forcing a confrontation between our theoretical principles and the complexities of human life. The issues of life and death-abortion, euthanasia, and capital punishment-are paradigmatic examples of applied ethics because they involve fundamental questions about the value of life, individual rights, and the role of the state.

Core Ethical Frameworks in Application

To analyze these issues, we often draw upon foundational ethical theories. Understanding these is crucial for dissecting the arguments surrounding life and death issues.

• Deontology: Associated primarily with Immanuel Kant, this framework emphasizes moral duties, rules, and intentions. An action is right if it conforms to a universal moral law (the Categorical Imperative), regardless of its consequences. For a deontologist, certain actions like killing an innocent person are intrinsically wrong.
• Consequentialism (specifically Utilitarianism): Associated with Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, this framework judges the morality of an action based on its outcomes or consequences. The right action is the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people (the principle of utility). It focuses on maximizing happiness and minimizing suffering.
• Virtue Ethics: Rooted in the philosophy of Aristotle, this framework focuses on the character of the moral agent rather than the actions or their consequences. It asks, “What would a virtuous person do?”. It emphasizes virtues like compassion, justice, courage, and temperance.
• Rights-Based Ethics: This approach emphasizes that individuals have certain inalienable rights (e.g., the right to life, liberty, bodily autonomy). An action is considered wrong if it violates these fundamental rights.

Abortion

Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy, resulting in the death of the embryo or fetus. The ethical debate surrounding induced abortion is one of the most contentious in applied ethics, primarily revolving around a single, fundamental question: What is the moral status of the fetus? The answer to this question often determines one’s entire position on the issue.

The Central Problem: The Moral Status of the Fetus

The core of the abortion debate is not typically about whether killing a person is wrong-most agree it is-but whether a fetus qualifies as a person with a right to life. This involves distinguishing between being a biological human and being a person in a moral sense.

• Biological Human: From conception, the zygote, embryo, and fetus possess a unique human genetic code (DNA). Biologically, it is an organism of the species Homo sapiens.
• Person: This is a philosophical concept, referring to a being with moral rights, such as the right to life. The criteria for personhood are debated and may include consciousness, self-awareness, rationality, the capacity to feel pain, and the ability to communicate.

The debate hinges on when, during gestation, a biological human becomes a moral person. Different positions mark this transition at different points: conception, implantation, the development of a heartbeat, brain activity, viability (the ability to survive outside the womb), or birth.

Arguments Against the Permissibility of Abortion Position)

These arguments typically assert that the fetus has a right to life from a very early stage, and that this right outweighs the pregnant woman’s right to choose.

1. The Sanctity of Life Argument: This view holds that human life is sacred and has intrinsic value from the moment of conception. Often rooted in religious doctrine (e.g., the belief that life is a gift from God), it can also be a secular principle asserting that all human life, regardless of its stage of development, deserves protection. To intentionally end a human life is considered intrinsically wrong.
2.  The Personhood from Conception Argument: This argument claims that a fetus is a full person from the moment of conception. The reasoning is that at conception, a being with a unique human genetic code is created, which contains all the information needed to develop into a mature human. There is no non-arbitrary line to draw after conception, so personhood must begin there.
3. The Potentiality Argument: This is a more nuanced argument. It concedes that a fetus may not be a person *now*, but it has the potential to become a person. Because of this potential, it has a right to life. To kill a fetus is to deprive it of its future as a person. The most famous version of this is Don Marquis’ “Future Like Ours” (FLO) argument. Marquis argues that what makes killing an adult human wrong is that it deprives them of a valuable future -a future of experiences, projects, and enjoyments. Since a fetus also has a future like ours, killing it is, for the same reason, prima facie seriously wrong.