3 ms·

Yes. To all of that. The second kidney would be a death sentence. If they sell it, they can do it for whatever reason they want. It is theirs. Life is not somet

Yes. To all of that. The second kidney would be a death sentence. If they sell it, they can do it for whatever reason they want. It is theirs. Life is not something to be held on to at all costs. Perhaps selling two kidneys would end that person's suffering and the resulting funds would end their children's or their friends'. People make calculated risks all of the time. My parents are not cool with me starting my own company that sells software services. They think that is a terrible risk. It is. I could lose everything. But I'm free to do that under the law. People take calculated risks when logging. Dismemberment is a real threat. Yet the funds they could make are worth it to them. Who are you to tell them they can't? I mean it when I ask, "Who are you to tell the they can't?" On what moral or ethical grounds do you restrict a person's liberty? If the worst that can happen is they die, why does that give you the authority to intervene against their wishes?

tptacek 10y ago
People take calculated risks when logging, but the logging industry has intensive safety requirements. There's a difference between accepting a heavily mitigated risk and exchanging money for your certain demise. This is a slippery slope argument; in a technical but real sense we accept mortal risk whenever we leave the house. Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not?
- virmundi 10y ago
  > Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Ideally no more than one parent, presuming a two parent household, but yes, I'm morally okay with that. The loss of a parent is sad. It will have an emotional impact. I think that the impact, coupled to the education the parent is seeking will probably cause the child to appreciate and succeed even more. Knowing that dad died to procure the college education will probably cause the child to work harder in HS and college. The parents have agency. They can look at a situation to see if they can get an outcome they appreciate. > Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not? No, but merely on the arbitrary like that I think agency matters. Agency underlying all things is a premise. I just state it as a fact. If that fact is wrong, all conclusions from it are at risk. I accept that philosophically. I also posit that mental illness precludes agency.

tptacek 10y ago

People take calculated risks when logging, but the logging industry has intensive safety requirements. There's a difference between accepting a heavily mitigated risk and exchanging money for your certain demise. This is a slippery slope argument; in a technical but real sense we accept mortal risk whenever we leave the house. Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not?

virmundi 10y ago
> Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Ideally no more than one parent, presuming a two parent household, but yes, I'm morally okay with that. The loss of a parent is sad. It will have an emotional impact. I think that the impact, coupled to the education the parent is seeking will probably cause the child to appreciate and succeed even more. Knowing that dad died to procure the college education will probably cause the child to work harder in HS and college. The parents have agency. They can look at a situation to see if they can get an outcome they appreciate. > Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not? No, but merely on the arbitrary like that I think agency matters. Agency underlying all things is a premise. I just state it as a fact. If that fact is wrong, all conclusions from it are at risk. I accept that philosophically. I also posit that mental illness precludes agency.