3 ms·

The article makes sense to me as a Dutch person. When you no longer believe that death is up to god (practically impossible to imagine for religious folks) it

by Yeul 1y ago

The article makes sense to me as a Dutch person. When you no longer believe that death is up to god (practically impossible to imagine for religious folks) it becomes a normal part of healthcare. Ain't nobody gonna spend even 1 day suffering needlessly if there's a medical way out.

KyleBerezin 1y ago
Devils advocate, but you could still make an argument that it is unnatural, therefore making it wrong to naturalist. Suffering induced suicide is virtually unheard of in nature.
- jdjdndndn 1y ago
  Suffering induced suicide is not a thing because normally a predator will eat a slow moving sick individual... So it is not suicide but arguably those creatures die
  - KyleBerezin 1y ago
    Certainly a good point.
- didibus 1y ago
  I find it's a very complex topic, and I'm not even sure where I stand on it. That said, I think one big aspect of it as I understand is that medical advances are related to the situation. A lot of people wouldn't have survived or be surviving without society's help and medical advances. In a simplified naturalist argument, you wouldn't expect people with those conditions to still be alive for the most part. Simply "unplugging" someone from society's help seems barbaric. You wouldn't just drop their medication, accessories, social aid, etc. Now you have this dilemma, most people don't want to see them suffer, and those people themselves don't want to suffer. Yet they are suffering, and we help them manage, pain meds, food, shelter, advanced machines, and what not. Now it creates this scenario where they can feel like a burden, and they're still going through a lot of suffering, but like I said, "unplugging" means going through even more suffering, it's hard for anyone to choose that option. At this point, everything has moved beyond "naturalism". We're in the here and now, with a context that is totally modern. There is a way to "unplug" that is suffering free, should it be an option on the table or not?
  - KyleBerezin 1y ago
    That is a good counter, medicine intrinsically is a violation of strict naturalism. The only hole I can find in that is that not all maid cases come about from the ability of modern medicine to prolong life. One such case is maid for psychiatric issues. I also don't know where I stand on this topic. I assume like anything there are going to be cases I absolutely disagree with, but as a whole, I think it is probably better than doctors secretly doing this themselves without support (It's not talked about a lot, but it is common)

by Yeul 1y ago

KyleBerezin 1y ago

Devils advocate, but you could still make an argument that it is unnatural, therefore making it wrong to naturalist. Suffering induced suicide is virtually unheard of in nature.

jdjdndndn 1y ago
Suffering induced suicide is not a thing because normally a predator will eat a slow moving sick individual... So it is not suicide but arguably those creatures die
- KyleBerezin 1y ago
  Certainly a good point.
didibus 1y ago
I find it's a very complex topic, and I'm not even sure where I stand on it. That said, I think one big aspect of it as I understand is that medical advances are related to the situation. A lot of people wouldn't have survived or be surviving without society's help and medical advances. In a simplified naturalist argument, you wouldn't expect people with those conditions to still be alive for the most part. Simply "unplugging" someone from society's help seems barbaric. You wouldn't just drop their medication, accessories, social aid, etc. Now you have this dilemma, most people don't want to see them suffer, and those people themselves don't want to suffer. Yet they are suffering, and we help them manage, pain meds, food, shelter, advanced machines, and what not. Now it creates this scenario where they can feel like a burden, and they're still going through a lot of suffering, but like I said, "unplugging" means going through even more suffering, it's hard for anyone to choose that option. At this point, everything has moved beyond "naturalism". We're in the here and now, with a context that is totally modern. There is a way to "unplug" that is suffering free, should it be an option on the table or not?
- KyleBerezin 1y ago
  That is a good counter, medicine intrinsically is a violation of strict naturalism. The only hole I can find in that is that not all maid cases come about from the ability of modern medicine to prolong life. One such case is maid for psychiatric issues. I also don't know where I stand on this topic. I assume like anything there are going to be cases I absolutely disagree with, but as a whole, I think it is probably better than doctors secretly doing this themselves without support (It's not talked about a lot, but it is common)