According to Dr. Philip Nitschke, machine inventor and euthanasia activist, he created this death pod for anyone who wants to “tow it off and have it overlooking the Alps or the lakes. When you're ready you say goodbye, use the code to get in, pull down the canopy, press a button and you die in a few minutes. It's a very peaceful death."
As you can predict, this machine, called Sarco, has been extremely controversial ever since it was announced in 2017 - because how can you regulate whether this is moral or not? Immanuel Kant, an influential German philosopher during the Age of Enlightenment, argued that each person is morally autonomous and should be respected for what they think is moral, but a moral action must act in everyone’s best interest. If we were to follow this philosophy, that means an action is moral if you believe it's harmless to you and others.
So if the person who uses Sarco willingly wants to die, gives consent to the company, and the technology physically poses no threat to others, then is this action moral?
Another take on this: Shannon Vallor, a philosopher of technology at Santa Clara University, says the ethics really depend on the situation at hand. If we were to utilize that thinking behind this device, we understand that Sarco is designed to be open-sourced online, which means anyone can download these design files and create their own chamber with a 3D printer. Problem is, some people are afraid mentally ill patients might obtain this without knowing what they’re getting into or that criminals are ending their lives before receiving punishment. Others argue that it’s a fundamental human right to decide how and when we want to end our lives – because it’s our own life - but some also argue that this technology is an assisted suicide, which is illegal in many countries. However, does being illegal really mean it is immoral?
Like many ethics problems in the world right now, it’s hard to reach any definite conclusion on the morality behind a suicide pod, but it can still be up to you to decide whether you think this machine is moral or not.
Hi Yuki,
ReplyDeleteI love your article it poses a really interesting ethical dilema that one could think for centuries. I also liked that you referenced Kant, I'm personally a fan of his work as well. I would believe for Kant to be against euthanasia, since when you commit the act you affect those that will miss you by provoking mental illness due to your death and the way you decided to go. I enjoyed your use of images and really liked your topic. I would've wished that you would talk in more detail about the dilemma but I understand that the blog format only permits a certain amount of words.
I would've suggested to incorporate a reading from the class a bit more than just quoting it. Try going into the detail of who the author (in this case Shannon Valor) is and what is the idea of their paper and how it connects to your topic.
Other than that I really like your post and see a lot of potential in it.