the existence of objective moral truth

Name: Chow Hui Yan Basia Subject Code: 9759Ctr/ Index: 3004 / 0064

The existence of objective moral truth

Name : Chow Hui Yan Basia

NRIC : S9709378D

Centre / Index: 3004 / 0064

School Name : Anglo-Chinese Junior College

Subject Name: Knowledge and Inquiry

Subject Code : 9759

Pg 1 of 16


This is the start of the Independent Study

1.0 Introduction

“There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide.”1 Suicide is

unique as one of the primary moral issues concerned with core moral concepts of

death and human suffering. As a result of its universality, and the central role it takes

in the concerns of human existence, it seems expected that we should have a unified

stance on the morality of suicide as an act which is inarguably immoral. However,

the fact of moral disagreement upends the expectation of moral agreement over

suicide. Across history, there have been multiple viewpoints at any one time that are

in conflict over the dilemma of the morality of suicide. This highlights the prevalence

of moral disagreement: even in an area like suicide where a moral convergence is to

be expected, moral disagreement occurs. This essay will diverge from the initial aims

of the proposal to focus on the concept of moral disagreement, rather than moral

conviction.

The question is: what does this disagreement reveal about the nature of morality?

The problem is that this question cannot be conclusively answered as moral theories

cannot be definitively proved or disproved. Hence, the criteria by which we judge the

superiority of ethical schools of thought will not be on a determinate justification for

moral disagreement, but on which explanations are the most plausible. Two schools

of meta-ethical inquiry, relativism and absolutism, dominate this discussion.

Initially, widespread disagreement seems to best be explained by meta-ethical

relativism, which holds that morality is relative to a particular stand point2. Meta-

1 A.Camus, The myth of Sisyphus, cited in A. Ronald, “Albert Camus” the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E.N. Zalta, (ed.), Spring 2012 Edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/camus/ 2 J. Fieser, “Ethics”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/#SH1a

Pg 2 of 16


ethical relativism accounts for descriptive relativism, since it is logical that a diversity

of contradictory moral frameworks will cause moral disagreement.3 Relativism thus

seems to provide the most rational and intuitively straightforward explanation for

moral disagreement.

In contrast, the absolutist is stymied by the problem of divergence, as meta-ethical

absolutism implies that moral convergence ought to occur, since it proposes that

morality exists as unconditional, universal law.4 The fact of widespread moral

disagreement contradicts this claim. Although it does not necessitate that

disagreement disproves absolutism, as convergence is only implied rather than

stated; it seems like the relativist has the better explanation for moral disagreement

since moral divergence logically follows from it.

However, there has been significant moral convergence on the morality of suicide as

an act which is immoral in contemporary times. Although there exists exceptions to

general moral agreement in which suicide is considered morally permissible, these

divergent perspectives on morality tend to occur only under extreme circumstances.

Furthermore, absolutism can account for moral disagreement as whatever

disagreement persists could plausibly simply be a temporary stage in the progress

towards moral convergence on absolute moral truth. However, these arguments for

absolutism in the face of moral disagreement, while applicable in the general context

of suicide, do not have the same plausibility when applied to specific moral

circumstances like euthanasia, where moral disagreement continues to persist.

2.0 Suicide and widespread moral agreement

3 G. Chris, "Moral Relativism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E>N. Zalta (ed.) Fall 2015 Edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/moral-relativism/,4 M. Smith, P. Singer (ed.), “Realism”, A Companion to Ethics, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 1993, pp.399-499

Pg 3 of 16


This argument shall begin from the absolutist’s point of view; to begin with, there

seems to be more moral convergence than disagreement in contemporary times

since there exists a general moral agreement on suicide as morally wrong. The

primary cause of suicide is mental illness, principally depression which accounts for

60-70% of suicide cases5. As a result, committing suicide is considered an act which

would not be rational under normal circumstances, since it is caused by a state of

psychological instability and great psychological pressure, rather than a logical

weighing of choice and consequence6. Furthermore, mental illnesses today are

conditions that can be resolved with psychological treatment, and studies have

shown that people’s suicidal inclinations will dissipate given time.7 As a result, people

consider it a waste to give up on life on the basis of unhappiness, since it is the

equivalent to an abandonment of hope and happiness in the future on the basis of a

temporary state of being.

These sentiments are reflected in statistics that classify suicide under the category of

a ‘highly unacceptable’ moral act in comparison to other issues like abortion, with a

minority of only 19% of participants believing that it is morally acceptable8. These

common attitudes on suicide as immoral have diffused into the implementation of

laws to regulate suicide in society. Suicide has been criminalized in most non-

western countries, particularly Islamic countries like Malaysia where, under section

309 of the Malaysian penal code, attempted suicide and any involvement with the

5 Y. Takahashi, “Depression and suicide” In T. Kariya, & M. Nakagawara (Ed.), Japan Medical Association Journal, Vol. 44, No. 8, 2001, pp. 359-3616 M. Cholbi, “Suicide”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E.N. Zalta (ed.), summer 2013 edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/7S.R. Blauner, How I stayed Sane when my brain was trying to kill me, cited in M. Cholbi, “Suicide”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E.N. Zalta (ed.), summer 2013 edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/8 R. Rifkin, “New Record Highs in Moral Acceptability”, http://www.gallup.com/poll/170789/new-record-highs-moral-acceptability.aspx

Pg 4 of 16


commission of such an offense is punishable with a year in jail, or a fine, or both.9

Therefore the absolutist can claim that morality is absolute since we share the same

moral principles, justified by widespread moral convergence on suicide as immoral.

3.1 Historical moral disagreement over suicide

However, moral thought on suicide has experienced more moral disagreement than

convergence historically. This is a result of the diversity of different cultural views on

morality. On one end of the spectrum, suicide was considered a mortal sin in 16 th

century England by Catholic and Protestant theologians.10 Influenced by this climate

of moral thought, Kant’s deontological argument from the sanctity of life argues that

suicide is immoral as it contravenes the moral imperative that we should not kill11.

In contrast, other cultures considered suicide a moral good. In Japan, seppuku was a

form of honourable suicide where samurai would disembowel themselves rather than

face dishonour.12 Hebraic culture shares this recurring theme of honourable suicide,

an example being the battle of Masada in A.D. 73, where 960 Jews committed

suicide to escape defeat at the hands of Roman invaders.13 Two millennia later, in

18th century Europe, suicide became fashionable amongst the aristocracy14. This

historical evidence of diverse and conflicting cultural perspectives on the morality of

9 “Suicide Legislation” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_legislation10 M. Georges, “The Seventeenth Century, Reaction and Repression,” History of suicide, in S.L Gilman (ed.) trans. L.G. Chochrane, The John Hopkins University Press, 2001, p. 11711 M. Cholbi, “Suicide”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E.N. Zalta(ed.), summer 2013 edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/12 J.M. Pierre, “Death with Honour: Seppuku in Japan”, Culturally Sanctioned Suicide: Euthanasia, seppuku and Terrorist Martyrdom, World Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 5, No.1, 2015, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369548/13 M. Georges, “ Suicide in the Middle Ages, Nuances: Suicide in the Hebraic World”, History of Suicide, in S.L Gilman (ed.) trans. L.G. Chochrane, The John Hopkins University Press, 2001, p. 2014M. Georges, “The Elite, from philosophical suicide to romantic suicide,” History of suicide, in S.L Gilman (ed.) trans. L.G. Chochrane, The John Hopkins University Press, 2001, p. 248

Pg 5 of 16


suicide implies that values are relative, since they differ based on convention and

norm.

3.2 Changing moral perspectives

Furthermore, the absolutist’s argument that there exists moral convergence can

alternatively be explained by the existence of relativistic value systems, as moral

convergence seems to occur as a result of the influence of external factors on moral

thought. Moral perspectives change to cohere with conventional perspectives on

suicide within particular time periods. This can be documented throughout history:

one example of this is the changing societal attitudes towards suicide in Europe,

which frequently fluctuated from condemnation, to respect, to sympathy, from the

middle ages to the Enlightenment15. This change in moral thought can be seen in

contemporary times as well, where the advent of globalization has resulted in

increasing interaction between different societies. A consequence of this is that

cultures become increasingly exposed to different value-systems and so take on

characteristics of foreign cultures. The pervasive western influence on Japan from

the colonial era to the present day has been one of the factors influencing Japan’s

cultural view of suicide as immoral, deviating from the traditional view of suicide as

an act of heroism16. Therefore, it is possible that the convergence over suicide has

been a consequence of external influences on relativistic value systems. This

eventually leads to moral convergence on conventional moral principles.

4.1 The trend of convergence

15 M. Georges, “From the French Revolution to the Twentieth Century, or, From Free Debate to Silence: Envoi,” History of suicide, in S.L Gilman (ed.) trans. L.G. Chochrane, The John Hopkins University Press, 2001, pp. 325-32816 J.M. Pierre, “Death with Honour: Seppuku in Japan”, Culturally Sanctioned Suicide: Euthanasia, seppuku and Terrorist Martyrdom, World Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 5, No.1, 2015,

Pg 6 of 16


Although relativism may better account for the fact of moral divergence,, and the

change in moral thought historically, absolutism better accounts for the overarching

trend of moral convergence over the moral dilemma of suicide. It is indisputable that

moral divergence exists, but this can occur even if morality is absolute, since people

are susceptible to having erroneous conceptions of morality because of reasons like

flaws in their moral intuitions, or errors of logic17. Hence, some people are morally

right while others are morally wrong, resulting in the creation of moral frameworks

that are contradictory, thus leading to moral disagreement. Because we possess an

intuitive need to find right the answers to moral dilemmas, based on an inherent

assumption that morality exists as absolute law, we are bound by our moral

convictions to persist in moral disagreement in prospect of the discovery of absolute

moral truth. 18 Therefore, moral disagreement exists as a temporary state of affairs

and a necessary precursor before reaching moral convergence. Thus, the absolutist

better explains the trend of convergence in which the fact of disagreement exists as

a temporary condition of moral development.

4.2 Exception proves the rule

Furthermore, divergent moral perspectives on suicide tend to exist only under

extreme circumstances, which are usually situations where a ‘greater good’ is

prioritized over individual happiness. In the modern day context, radical Islamic

fundamentalists regard suicide as morally permissible and engage in suicide

bombing as a method of waging a jihad against those whom they deem a threat to

their way of life and survival.19 It is considered martyrdom rather than sin, a form of

17 R. Wedgewood, “Disagreement among Philosophers”, Challenges to moral and religious belief: Disagreement and Evolution, in M. Bergmann, O. Kain (ed.), Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 15-2618 L.J. Skitka, “The Psychology of Moral Conviction”, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, University of Illinois at Chicago, Blackwell publishing, no.4, 2010, pp. 267-27019“Suicide attack”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack

Pg 7 of 16


altruistic suicide where collective interest is prioritized above the individual’s

happiness20. Similarly, the Japanese concept of suicide as honourable during World

War Two was a form of indoctrination by a fanatically nationalistic, fascist society.

This gave rise to mass exultation of kamikaze pilots.21 Similar cases of altruistic

suicide occur in wartime, in suicide charges, and cases where soldiers choose to

commit suicide by throwing themselves on grenades to save their comrades.

Precisely because suicide is considered so taboo, so is committing it for a greater

cause considered the ultimate sacrifice, where the act commands admiration rather

than condemnation from society. Therefore, moral divergence on suicide under

extreme circumstances is in fact a case of the exception proving the rule: under

normal situations, there will be moral agreement on suicide as immoral.

So far, absolutism seems like the better explanation for moral disagreement. Moral

convergence on suicide implies that morality is absolute. Cases of moral

disagreement can be accounted for as a temporary state of affairs before

convergence occurs, and these tend to occur only under extenuating circumstances.

Unlike other moral issues, widespread agreement on suicide as immoral occurs

likely because it is a core moral issue that is universalizable. As a result, people tend

to share the same moral views on suicide, which implies that morality exists as

absolute law.

5.1 Euthanasia: diverging from the norm of agreement

However, the absolutist’s explanation is not as universal as it does not apply across

all moral situations, in particular the contemporary moral controversy over

20 R. Hassan, “What motivates the suicide bombers? Study of a comprehensive database gives a surprising answer.”, YaleGlobal Online, Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, 2009, http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/what-motivates-suicide-bombers-021 “Kamikaze”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze#Definition_and_etymology

Pg 8 of 16


euthanasia. Moral views regarding euthanasia in large part agree that it ought to be

morally permissible, which diverges from the common agreement on suicide as

immoral. For the purpose of limiting the scope of this case study in light of the

complexity of the euthanasia debate, this essay will focus on voluntary and active

euthanasia where the patient is fully rational and capable of giving consent for

death22. Euthanasia is defined as the act of suicide motivated by painful, or incurable

terminal illness23.

Euthanasia is regarded as an act that is morally permissible. This is because unlike

‘conventional’ forms of suicide, where suffering is temporary and resolvable,

euthanasia is motivated by permanent and prolonged suffering.24 Condemning those

who choose euthanasia thus becomes a difficult moral choice to swallow. In a 2013

survey, a majority of 62% considered euthanasia morally right in light of suffering,

57% if it was motivated by an incurable illness25. Most people tend to believe that

euthanasia is morally right, undermining the claim that morality is absolute since it

refutes the basis upon which the absolutist’s argument rests, that that there is moral

agreement on suicide.

A way to counter to this would be to argue that euthanasia is irrelevant to suicide as

it is a separate moral issue entirely. However, this is unlikely as the act of euthanasia

is motivated by personal reasons rather extreme circumstances, and is essentially a

form of suicide. The consequence of this is that it implies there exists irreconcilable

22 R. Young, “Voluntary Euthanasia”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E.N. Zalta (ed.), Fall 2015 edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/23 R. Young, “Voluntary Euthanasia”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E.N. Zalta (ed.), Fall 2015 edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/24 Rachels J., “The Morality of euthanasia”, The Right Thing To Do, in Rachels S. (ed.), New York: Mcgraw Hill, 2007, pp. 151-15525 L. Lugo, A. Cooperman, C. Funk and E. O’Connell, Views on end of life treatments: growing minority of Americans say doctors should do everything possible to keep patients alive, PewResearchCentre, 2013, p.7 http://www.pewforum.org/2013/11/21/views-on-end-of-life-medical-treatments/

Pg 9 of 16


moral disagreement over suicide since people consider euthanasia moral while

concurrently believing that suicide is immoral. This moral paradox shows that

euthanasia causes moral disagreement over suicide to become irreconcilable.

This further highlights the intractability of moral disagreement as it implies that

morality is relative, since the problem of suicide has conclusions relative to different

contexts like that of euthanasia. Absolutism may be the better explanation for the

trend of moral convergence over suicide in general, but in specific moral situations

like euthanasia, it cannot account for divergence from general agreement that

suicide is immoral. This challenges the perception of morality as absolute, as the fact

is that this implies that morality is relative, since the absolutist cannot account for

divergence from moral agreement on suicide as a moral act in the context of

euthanasia

5.2 Euthanasia: an inconclusive moral dilemma

Although there seems to be a small majority agreeing that euthanasia ought to be

moral, moral debate over euthanasia remains largely divided and inconclusive

especially because it is a fairly current moral problem26. By and large, the attitude

people possess towards the controversy over euthanasia is that of uncertainty,

reflected in international disagreement over the question of its legalization, with

reactions of nations varying from the criminalizing to legalizing euthanasia as a

medical practice.27

26 L. Lugo, A. Cooperman, C. Funk and E. O’Connell, Views on end of life treatments: growing minority of Americans say doctors should do everything possible to keep patients alive, PewResearchCentre, 2013, p. 18 http://www.pewforum.org/2013/11/21/views-on-end-of-life-medical-treatments/27 J. Pereira, “Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide: The illusion of safeguards and controls”, Current Oncology, no. 2, 2011, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070710/

Pg 10 of 16


This uncertainty is derived from the difficulty of reaching moral agreement over

euthanasia since moral disagreement over the issue is marked by its diversity and

complexity. It cannot be denied that moral disagreement over euthanasia continues

to persist: moral arguments are varied and contradictory, ranging from those based

on utilitarianism, to liberalism, to deontology and even religion. Some pro-euthanasia

arguments are based on theories like the argument from individual autonomy, which

asserts that the right of freedom of choice extends to suicide.28 This assertion is

challenged by anti-euthanasia arguments claiming that murder in any form, including

suicide, is absolutely wrong regardless of circumstance.29 Moral disagreement over

suicide is characterized by the range of incompatible principles and contradictory

arguments emerging from it.

To complicate matters further, moral arguments over euthanasia have grown to

become increasingly complex, and by extension, more difficult to resolve. For

instance, if euthanasia is considered to be murder, worries over euthanasia

corrupting the doctor’s role as a healer, or resulting in a slippery slope argument to

justify the elimination of people deemed useless to society, arise.30 Non-moral or

semi-moral issues have also emerged. For example, a patient’s quality of life is used

as criteria for measuring the extent of suffering used to justify the choice to

euthanize. However, conducting this assessment is impractical as it is difficult to

determine what factors, exactly, constitute quality of life, which ranges widely from

28 K. Crocker, “Why euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are morally permissible”, Honors Ethical Issues and Life Choices, State Florida University, no. 10, 2013, p. 5, http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=phi263029 R. Young, “Voluntary Euthanasia”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in E.N. Zalta (ed.), Fall 2015 edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/30 K. Crocker, “Why euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are morally permissible”, Honors Ethical Issues and Life Choices, State Florida University, no. 10, 2013, pp.7-12, http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=phi2630

Pg 11 of 16


human dignity to the ability to perform basic survival functions.31 As a result, moral

convergence on the euthanasia debate seems increasingly unlikely due to the

problem of complexity and diversity of disagreement.

In light of this, the problem the absolutist faces is that, though it becomes necessary

to compromise to find a conclusion to the euthanasia debate, this occurs at the

expense of absolute moral truth. The problem of moral disagreement over

euthanasia results in a clash between incompatible absolute moral values, where it

becomes necessary that a choice be made on which values are superior in order to

find the right answer to the problem of moral disagreement over euthanasia. This is a

serious issue for absolutism, as the fact that it occurs at all undermines the claim that

morality is absolute, since that necessitates that moral principles cannot be

abandoned, or altered. Furthermore, having to assess and choose between moral

principles suggests that these principles, despite being equally valid, are relative to

one another on the basis of certain values being superior. As a result, it is difficult to

insist that morality is absolute when a choice between absolute values has to be

made.

Conclusion

The moral dilemma of suicide has different expressions under different contexts,

where there is a shift between absolutism to relativism as the better explanation for

moral disagreement, especially when particular moral circumstances become

increasingly conditional. In the beginning, absolutism initially holds true on the basis

of general agreement over the immorality of suicide. Gradual progress towards a

31 L. Lugo, A. Cooperman, C. Funk and E. O’Connell, Views on end of life treatments: growing minority of Americans say doctors should do everything possible to keep patients alive, PewResearchCentre, 2013, pp. 26-27, http://www.pewforum.org/2013/11/21/views-on-end-of-life-medical-treatments/

Pg 12 of 16


convergence on our ethical views suggest that morality will eventually converge onto

absolute moral truth.

However divergent moral circumstances like euthanasia are better accounted for by

relativism. Euthanasia is considered morally permissible as people are unable

condemn suicide as immoral, in light of the permanent suffering terminally ill patients

must endure if the choice to die is kept from them. This divergence from moral

agreement on suicide as immoral implies that morality does not operate on absolute

principles but is relative to circumstances.

Furthermore, the absolutist seems unable to resolve the problem of incompatible

absolute values. While the way we think about morality may be in terms of absolutes,

this becomes irrational when moral paradoxes occur over contradictory principles,

hindering our understanding of moral knowledge. Relativism, on the other hand, can

easily explain this on the premise that all moral principles, despite being equally valid

can be evaluated since they are relative to each other. Therefore, the absolutist’s

greatest obstacle lies in its inability to account for the moral dilemmas involving

complex arguments, especially when these involve contradictory absolute moral

principles. In this area, relativism has the upper hand as it can provide a simpler and

more intuitive explanation for this phenomenon.

In spite of this, absolutism ultimately remains the better explanation for moral

disagreement since it accounts for the general agreement on suicide as immoral.

However it cannot be fully defended as there exists unique situations where moral

perspectives diverge from general agreement. In these scenarios, the necessity of

having to weigh competing principles means that a relativistic explanation has the

upper hand. Because the nature of moral disagreement is that it is constantly in flux,

Pg 13 of 16


and involves an array of competing voices on morality, moral convergence has

understandably remained an ideal rather than a fact. Rather than taking a

pessimistic view that convergence will never be realised, it should be noted that in

light of the unusual amount of convergence on suicide as immoral, it is not

inconceivable that absolute moral truth can be discovered through moral discourse in

the future.

This is the end of the Independent Study

Word Count: 3000 words

Bibliography

“Kamikaze”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze#Definition_and_etymology, (last accessed 12

September 2015)

“Suicide attack”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack, (last accessed 11 September 2015)

“Suicide Legislation”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_legislation, (last accessed 11 September

2015)

Rifkin R., “New Record Highs in Moral Acceptability”, http://www.gallup.com/poll/170789/new-record-

highs-moral-acceptability.aspx (last accessed 11 September 2015)

Hassan R., “What motivates the suicide bombers? Study of a comprehensive database gives a

surprising answer.”,YaleGlobal Online, Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, 2009,

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/what-motivates-suicide-bombers-0 (last accessed 13 September

2015)

Pg 14 of 16

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/what-motivates-suicide-bombers-0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze#Definition_and_etymology


Aronson R., "Albert Camus", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in Zalta, E.N. (ed.), Spring

2012 Edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/camus/ (accessed 13 September

2015)

Cholbi M., “Suicide”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in Zalta E.N.(ed.), summer 2013

edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/, ( last accessed 11 September 2015)

Young, R., “Voluntary Euthanasia”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in Zalta E.N. (ed.), Fall 2015

edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/ (last accessed 12 September 2015)

Gowans C., "Moral Relativism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in Zalta E.N. (ed.), Fall

2015 Edition, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/moral-relativism/, (accessed 13

September 2015)

Fieser J., “Ethics”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/#SH1a,

(accessed 13 September 2015)

Smith M., “Realism”, in Singer, P., (ed.), A Companion to Ethics, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 1993,

Georges M., “The Seventeenth Century, Reaction and Repression,” History of suicide, in Gilman S.L.

(ed.), trans. Chochrane L.G., The John Hopkins University Press, 2001,

Georges M., “Suicide in the Middle Ages, Nuances: Suicide in the Hebraic World”, History of Suicide,

in Gilman S.L. (ed.), trans. Chochrane L.G., The John Hopkins University Press, 2001,

Georges M., “The Elite, from philosophical suicide to romantic suicide,” History of suicide, in Gilman

S.L. (ed.), trans. Chochrane L.G., The John Hopkins University Press, 2001,

Georges M., “From the French Revolution to the Twentieth Century, or, From Free Debate to Silence:

Envoi,” History of suicide, in Gilman S.L. (ed.), trans. Chochrane L.G.,The John Hopkins University

Press, 2001,

Takahashi Y., “Depression and suicide” In Kariya T., & Nakagawara M., (Ed.), Japan Medical

Association Journal, Vol. 44, No. 8, 2001, http://www.med.or.jp/english/pdf/2001_08/359_363.pdf (last

accessed 11 September 2015)

Pierre J.M., “Death with Honour: Seppuku in Japan”, Culturally Sanctioned Suicide: Euthanasia,

seppuku and Terrorist Martyrdom, World Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 5, No.1, 2015,

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369548/ (last accessed 11 September 2015)

Pg 15 of 16

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369548/

http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/#SH1a

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/moral-relativism/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/camus/


Wedgewood R., “Disagreement among Philosophers”, Challenges to moral and religious belief:

Disagreement and Evolution, in Bergmann M., Kain O. (ed.), Oxford University Press, 2014,

http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~wedgwood/Disagreement_among_Philosophers.pdf (last accessed 13

September 2015)

Skitka L.J., “The Psychology of Moral Conviction”, Social and Personality Psychology Compass,

University of Illinois at Chicago, Blackwell publishing, no.4, 2010,

http://www.uic.edu/labs/skitka/public_html/Compass_MC.pdf (last accessed 10 September 2015)

Rachels J., “The Morality of euthanasia”, The Right Thing To Do, in Rachels S. (ed.), New York:

Mcgraw Hill, 2007, https://www.clevelandclinic.org/civiceducation/pdf/Session12.pdf (last accessed 11

September 2015)

Lugo L., Cooperman A., Funk C. and O’Connell E., Views on end of life treatments: growing minority

of Americans say doctors should do everything possible to keep patients alive, PewResearchCentre,

2013 , http://www.pewforum.org/2013/11/21/views-on-end-of-life-medical-treatments/,(last accessed

11 September 2015)

Pereira J., “Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide: The illusion of safeguards and controls”,

Current Oncology, no. 2, 2011, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070710/, (last

accessed 12 September 2015)

Crocker K., “Why euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are morally permissible”, Honors Ethical

Issues and Life Choices, State Florida University, no. 10, 2013,

http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=phi2630, (last accessed 12

September 2015)

Pg 16 of 16

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070710/

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/11/21/views-on-end-of-life-medical-treatments/

the existence of objective moral truth

Documents