Essay about Arguments Against Euthanasia
Values are typically argued in hierarchies.
Values promote action. (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca 65-76) If a value is preferable, it is connected with a specific viewpoint. It is also only arguable to a particular audience (the actual audience addressed) instead of a universal one (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca 66). Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca declare that “the existence of values, as to particular ways of acting, is connected with the idea of multiplicity of groups” (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca 66). They further go on to claim that “one appeals to values in order to induce the hearer to make certain choices rather than others and, most of all, to justify those choices so that they may be accepted and approved by others” (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca 75). This is an example of a value hierarchy, where some “values are adhered to with different degrees of intensity, but the audience admits principles by which the values can be graded” (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca 80). Often, the hierarchies permit the values to be independent of each other as well; nevertheless, achieving these three prior criteria enables the fourth to come to light: values promote action. Often, this action can be as explicit as a call for action. We can now apply this preceding criteria to the two articles at hand. In the AMA's article, which is housed in a section called Code of Medical Ethics, the AMA