Skip to main content

Euthanasia

By
This letter was published in the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age on 31 July:
 
Indignity of suffering
 
One small but crucial aspect was ignored in your editorial on euthanasia (''Legalise the right to choose assisted death'', 28/7). It is not only terminal illness which may justify a decision to end one's life. Unrelievable existential suffering is just as real as unbearable pain, and may be present when death is not imminent. This is the suffering associated with some severe conditions and may include an unbearable loss of dignity, complete absence of autonomy, and persistent crippling fear, among others. Because it may seem less tangible than terminal illness, including it in the debate could be just too hard for some people. But the relief of all kinds of suffering needs to be talked about for the subject to be considered in full.
Paul Laycock, Malvern

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sort of

By
There is a moving essay on the philosopher Daniel Dennett, in a recent New Yorker. It's by Joshua Rothman. This excerpt is near the end: "Then, late last year, my mother had a catastrophic stroke. It devastated the left side of her brain, wrecking her parietal and temporal lobes and Broca’s area—parts of the brain that are involved in the emotions, the senses, memory, and speech. My mother now appears to be living in an eternal present. She can say only two words, “water” and “time.” She is present in the room—she looks me in the eye—but is capable of only fleeting recognition; she knows only that I am someone she should recognize. She grasps the world, but lightly. As I spent time with my mother, I found that my intuitions were shifting to Dennett’s side of the field. It seems natural to say that she “sort of” thinks, knows, cares, remembers, and understands, and that she is “sort of” conscious. It seems obvious that there is no “light switch” for consciousness: she is ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The brain

By
  The brain has become everyone's subject, perhaps because evidence for an afterlife or a godlike creator stubbornly refuses to reveal itself.  (and perhaps Psychoanalysis is another god that failed ) The human brain is now thought to contain the answers we have failed to find elsewhere. Neuroscience will explain our emotional responses as well as our problem solving abilities and our indefatigablecuriosity.    Purpose, however, may remain the domain of philosophy. Eagelman emphasises the unconscious functioning which determines most of our actions and decisions, and acknowledges Freud's insight that much of behaviour is a product of unseen mental processes. The concept of extended mind, whereby external stimuli and exchanges with other minds enables broader conceptualising capacity and creativity that an isolated human could not achieve, may in turn be extended by AI into some new more complex form of mind. One can choose to greet this news with optimism, as heralding a leap f...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mind

By
Is consciousness just an illusion? Cognitive scientist Daniel Dennett believes the human brain might not be that special. Is the human brain really just a collection of complex machines? http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39482345
Post a Comment
Read more