Abstract
The doctrine of the sanctity of life is associated with two great traditions of thought, one eastern and the other western. The eastern tradition is most perfectly realized in Jainism, a religion of India that is older than recorded history. The Jains believe that all life is sacred, with no sharp distinction drawn between animal life and human life. The Jain monk’s devotion to this precept is awesome:
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
Ninian Smart, The Religious Experience of Mankind (London: Fontana Library, 1971), p. 106.
Albert Schweitzer, Civilization and Ethics translated by John Naish; reprinted in Tom Regan and Peter Singer (eds.) Animals Rights and Human Obligations (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1976), p. 134.
St. Augustine, The Catholic and Manichaean Ways of Life translated by D. A. Gallagher and I. J. Gallagher (Boston: Catholic University Press, 1966), p. 102.
There were some small exceptions made, which for present purposes we may ignore. For example, a virgin was allowed to commit suicide to avoid being raped. Virginity was very highly prized. This dispensation remained in effect until St. Augustine argued that chastity is more a matter of the mind than the body, but there is no record of how many women took advantage of it.
On this point, see Peter Singer, “Unsanctifying Human Life,” in John Ladd (ed.), Ethical Issues Relating to Life and Death (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), pp. 41–61.
I have learned much about this distinction from William Ruddick in conversations over a period of years. He makes use of it in his essay “Parents and Life Prospects,” in Onora O’Neill and William Ruddick (eds.) Having Children (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), pp. 123–137.
Anthony Shaw, “Dilemmas of ‘Informed Consent’ in Children,” The New England Journal of Medicine 289 (1973), 885–890; and Raymond S. Duff and A. G. M. Campbell, “Moral and Ethical Dilemmas in the SpecialCare Nursery,” The New England Journal of Medicine 289 (1973), 890–894.
Robert M. Veatch, Case Studies in Medical Ethics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977), p. 328.
Joseph Sullivan, “The Immorality of Euthanasia,” in Marvin Kohl (ed.), Beneficent Euthanasia (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1975), 12.
Epictetus, Dissertations I, IX, 16.
H. F. and M. K. Harlow, Lessons from Animal Behavior for the Clinician (London: National Spastics Society, 1962), ch. 5.
For more on the question of whether animals have lives, and its moral implications, see J. Rachels, “Do Animals Have a Right to Life?” in Harlan B. Miller and William H. Williams (eds.), Ethics and Animals (Clifton, NJ: The Humana Press, 1983).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1983 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rachels, J. (1983). The Sanctity of Life. In: Humber, J.M., Almeder, R.F. (eds) Biomedical Ethics Reviews · 1983. Biomedical Ethics Reviews. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-439-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-439-9_2
Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-4632-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-439-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive