Essays on Philosophy That Got Me My Scholarship

Peter Singer

Peter Singer is an Australian Bioethics professor in the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University, having a background on Philosophy and is known for his contribution on the study of Utilitarianism mainly on Animal Liberation. Singer’s view on timely ethical dilemmas such as Euthanasia, Infanticide, and Abortion often turn heads; receiving support and also backlashes, earning him the label as “World’s Most Influential Living Philosopher” by journalists today (1 ). Peter’s opinions heat up conversations and debates due to its uncanniness particularly his views on “humanness” and “life”; both intricate factors when it comes to the talk of Euthanasia. Peter use “A Quality Life” ( 2) ethic rather than “Sanctity of Life” ( 3), believing that not all lives are equally important, unfortunately, some lives are worth keeping than the others (4 ).Putting it this way, a baby born with paralysis; having no ability to move a muscle, communicate both orally and verbally, and has no reasoning, was given the chance to live, thanks to medical machinery, is not living a life at all due to the fact that only the potentiality of it was taken to consideration yet the actuality that the child will never heal thus resulting to its value kept stagnant were put out of the picture( 5). Peter Singer stand by his belief that disposing a defective infant with no “humanness” in it is the same as ending a patient with no more brain activities present.

Killing is morally wrong because it forcefully takes out the person’s right and will to live, something that is a part of its humanness; the actualization for the desire to be alive ( 6). In application to euthanasia for mentally challenged and disabled infants, Peter argues that the disposal of these children doesn’t oppose the moral status of an individual because they are not yet bestowed the rights to be called “human” since they are incapable of expressing their desire to live (7 ). In an article written by Herlinde Pauer-Studer, she clarifies that Singer’s definition of “humanness” doesn’t solely focus on the desire to live but also the presence of self-consciousness, ability to communicate and relate with others, curiosity, and having a sense of future and past (8 ). Disabled infants; both mentally and physically disoriented, may not be able to develop their “humanness” fully; the potential was there yet actuality tip the scale. For an instance, an infant born with Down’s Syndrome will have difficulties to develop it’s potential since it will cost way too much assets to sustain its lifestyle; medical tests, maintenance medicine, and education. Peter’s beliefs on euthanasia and infanticide somehow make sense and that keeping an infant that doesn’t meet the parents’ standards or preferences, all because it is immoral to kill a “human”, is shallow. The advance technology today made it convenient to know whether an infant is indeed lacking of mental capability or the “humanness” Peter’s been talking about. Down’s Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, and other mental disabilities can now be detected with the use of Affymetrix CytoScan® Dx Assay. The purpose of the molecular cytogenetic testing is to identify genetic abnormalities in concern with cognitive behavioral and motor symptoms. Albeit Chromosomal Microarray (CMA), already exist before the CytoScan and was able to detect congenital anomalies, the United States Food and Drug Administration did not acknowledge any of its testing. CytoScan is probably the first kit that can detect developmental delays in such accuracy without compromise. It is said that “CytoScan® Dx Assay is the first DFA-cleared whole-genome diagnostic test to aid physicians in identifying the underlying genetic cause of developmental delay, intellectual disability, congenital anomalies, or dysmorphic features in children.” (9) The kit is consisting of both Carbon Nanopipettes and SOFIE Probe Network use to explicate allelic imbalances and point out absence or loss of heterozygosity that can be a symptom or increase in the risk of recessive disorder.
 
Most will argue in opposition to Peter Singer’s stand on disabled infants euthanasia with the reason that it is immoral and is considered a murder then again, an alive infant with just the potential to grow but have no actuality to live it’s life with a purpose and contribute something to the society is nothing but a burden, specially to their parents. Without its “humanness”, there will be no development to its value thus it’s worth is none existent and is nothing but a parasite to the society; having to take merely for its benefit whilst consuming the assets that could’ve been more useful if given to an infant that is not disabled and has the “humanness” Peter Singer elaborated. 
_______________________________

97/100 for my GWA or GPA(?) that's a flat "1" for this subject. This essay is 95/100 because I put "Midterm Paper" rather than "Final Paper" stupehhhhd, right? 😂