Position analysis of Wennberg
In my opinion, he does not agree
with euthanasia and I would like to reveal what the position of Wennberg on the
issue of euthanasia is. He has a negative position toward active
euthanasia, and passive euthanasia is (on occasion) morally permissible for
him. Thus, his position was thought that it is close to the third opinion
in the textbook. Then, I will explain why I thought such as that in this
writing with using three types of evidence from the textbook, first focuses on
the words he used, second is from section of the option and alternatives and
third is from public opinion.
First, he used the words of
“not always”, “at least sometimes” or “namely” in the second option, both
passive and active euthanasia might be morally permissible. These words
indicate that the euthanasia is not acceptable for the people at every
situation and this shows the negative position of Wenbberg to the euthanasia.
Thus, he doesn’t have a positive idea about euthanasia.
Second is that it can
be found what his position is close to option three because he focused on third
alternative again at the bottom of the section. It says the third one
strikes many as a sane middle ground between the more extreme positions
represented by the first and second. According to this text, third option
is easier to be understood by the people than other options, however it tends
to be attacked at the same time. It is thought that he wanted to show how
major the position third is and what he is one of them to use this evidence.
Therefore, his position on the euthanasia is close to option third
(passive euthanasia is morally permissible, but active euthanasia is always wrong).
Third, he used many
evidences of the suffering or painful at the terminal disease, and he stated
about the possibility of euthanasia to the people who are in that situation.
Moreover, he used the public opinion to euthanasia. However, in the public
opinions section, he stated that the question was focused only on features of
the situation that would dispose one to give a favorable response. For
instance, no hope of recovery or incurably ill. Therefore, we can think
the possibility of euthanasia at the terminal situation and our opinion tends
to be changed by environment. It is not legitimately survey and he
explained the public opinion critically. From these surveys, He does not agree
with euthanasia.
In this essay, it focuses on the
position of Wennberg and I concluded his position is the third option and
alternatives. He uses the negative word in the textbook and tends to think
critically about euthanasia. Additionally, he cited multiple examples
and compare with all situation, for instance, religiously environment or the
situation of patient. As viewing his opinion, his position is that he does not agree
with euthanasia, especially active euthanasia.
