>This is not an entirely satisfactory solution to what is, at its essence, a
>moral paradox. Rather, it comes from "a rough sense of justice . . . This is
>not logic. It is practical politics." The practical politics of friendship.
Well, actually, Greg, I think that your words are far more satisfactory
than you apparently do.
>On the one hand, one presumes that individual autonomy is
>the bedrock of a rational ethics.
I wonder if it's not so much a question of whether to try and keep someone
alive as of whether to try and maintain their autonomy. A dead person has,
IMHO, no autonomy. If a person tries to take away their own autonomy, one
should stop them. If one draws a line here, one can both save the person's
life, and maintain those libertarian ethics.
>On the other, a paramount value on life
>itself seems to be the sine qua non of any
>POSSIBILITY of sane moral action.
Are you sure that these two are mutually exclusive?
Thanks, Greg. Your light shines through the murk.
Darren