Utilitas 21 (2):246-248 (2009)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
It is hard to do justice, in a short reply, to Eyal's excellent review. Accordingly, I will focus on what I take to be its central claim – namely that I fail to give proper consideration to the extent to which the forced extraction of body parts undermines individuals' opportunities for self-respect. According to Eyal, ‘body exceptionalism’ can be defended on the following grounds: ‘People usually see trespass into a person and into objects they associate with a person – especially into a person's body – as utterly disrespectful towards that person and her autonomy’ . And later: ‘Whether or not organ confiscation is truly disrespectful . . . its widespread and intractable perception as a humiliating violation counts heavily against it, because it can thwart opportunities for self-respect’
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1017/s0953820809003525 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
In Reply [Reply to Commentaries on "How to Solve the Mind-Body Problem"].Nicholas Humphrey - 2000 - Humphrey, Nicholas (2000) in Reply [Reply to Commentaries on "How to Solve the Mind-Body Problem"]. [Journal (Paginated)] 7 (4):98-112.
Whose Body is It Anyway?: Justice and the Integrity of the Person.Cécile Fabre - 2006 - Oxford University Press.
Can It Be Ethical to Apply Limited Resources in Low-Income Countries to Ineffective, Low-Reach Smoking Cessation Strategies? A Reply to Bitton and Eyal.S. Chapman & R. Mackenzie - 2012 - Public Health Ethics 5 (1):29-37.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-04-28
Total views
124 ( #95,582 of 2,519,696 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #166,865 of 2,519,696 )
2009-04-28
Total views
124 ( #95,582 of 2,519,696 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #166,865 of 2,519,696 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads