Tutorial Discussion: Peter SingerTutorial Discussion: Peter Singer

Peter Singer’s Argument 1Peter Singer’s Argument 1 Premise OnePremise One: A future life that will be : A future life that will be

miserable is not worth-living and so miserable is not worth-living and so should be terminated during infancyshould be terminated during infancy

Premise TwoPremise Two: The future life of a : The future life of a severe case of spina bifida will be severe case of spina bifida will be miserablemiserable

ConclusionConclusion: The future life of a severe : The future life of a severe case of spina bifida is not worth-living case of spina bifida is not worth-living and so should be terminated during and so should be terminated during infancy (i.e., euthanasia)infancy (i.e., euthanasia)

Strategy One: to reject Premise Strategy One: to reject Premise OneOne -- -- Option 1. Option 1.

Though a life Though a life might bemight be miserable i miserable in n the futurethe future, human beings should not , human beings should not kill another human being. We should kill another human being. We should alleviate the pain by palliative alleviate the pain by palliative medicine and be supportive rather medicine and be supportive rather than to be destructive.than to be destructive.

Option 2Option 2..A future life that will be “miserable” A future life that will be “miserable”

mightmight still be worth-living because still be worth-living because whether a life is whether a life is worth-livingworth-living or not is a or not is a value judgementvalue judgement, which varies from , which varies from person to person. It often happens that person to person. It often happens that lives which observers consider of poor lives which observers consider of poor quality are lived quite satisfactorily by quality are lived quite satisfactorily by the one living that life. Human beings the one living that life. Human beings are amazingly adaptive. E.g., are amazingly adaptive. E.g., 王均王均祥、祥、 Stephen HawkinsStephen Hawkins

Strategy Two: to reject Premise Strategy Two: to reject Premise TwoTwo

The future life of a severe case of The future life of a severe case of spina bifida will spina bifida will notnot be miserable be miserable because one can overcome the because one can overcome the physical hardships of this congenital physical hardships of this congenital defect and remain cheerful in life. defect and remain cheerful in life. E.g., E.g., 泳桁泳桁

Peter Singer’s Argument 2Peter Singer’s Argument 2

Premise OnePremise One: A future life that will decrease : A future life that will decrease the overall social level of happiness should the overall social level of happiness should be terminated during infancy.be terminated during infancy.

Premise TwoPremise Two: The future life of a Downs : The future life of a Downs Syndrome or hemophilia baby, if can be Syndrome or hemophilia baby, if can be replaced by a “normal” baby, will decrease replaced by a “normal” baby, will decrease the overall social level of happiness.the overall social level of happiness.

ConclusionConclusion: The future life of a Downs : The future life of a Downs Syndrome or hemophilia baby, if can be Syndrome or hemophilia baby, if can be replaced by a “normal” baby, should be replaced by a “normal” baby, should be terminated during infancy (i.e., euthanasia)terminated during infancy (i.e., euthanasia)

Strategy One: to reject Premise Strategy One: to reject Premise OneOne

A future life that will decrease the A future life that will decrease the overall social level of happiness overall social level of happiness should should notnot be terminated during be terminated during infancy because every life is sacred infancy because every life is sacred or worthwhile in itself, and can be or worthwhile in itself, and can be enjoyed in itself, regardless of its enjoyed in itself, regardless of its degree of social contribution.degree of social contribution.

Strategy Two: to reject Premise Strategy Two: to reject Premise 22 The future life of a Downs Syndrome or The future life of a Downs Syndrome or

hemophilia baby, if can be replaced by a hemophilia baby, if can be replaced by a “normal” baby, will “normal” baby, will not necessarilynot necessarily decrease decrease the overall social level of happiness. the overall social level of happiness.

This is because happiness is difficult to This is because happiness is difficult to quantify and measure, especially long-term quantify and measure, especially long-term happiness. The happiness of a family with a happiness. The happiness of a family with a Downs Syndrome child might be as much as Downs Syndrome child might be as much as the happiness of a family without a Downs the happiness of a family without a Downs Syndrome child. Syndrome child.

The happiness of a family with a hemophilia The happiness of a family with a hemophilia child child mightmight be even greater than the be even greater than the happiness of a family without a hemophilia happiness of a family without a hemophilia child, whose “normal” child might eventually child, whose “normal” child might eventually commit suicide, become gangsters, or die in commit suicide, become gangsters, or die in SARS. There is no guaranteed predictions.SARS. There is no guaranteed predictions.