The survival lottery
Encyclopedia
The Survival Lottery is a thought experiment
, proposed by the philosopher John Harris
. The basis of the idea is to ask people to imagine if organ donation
were expected to save more individuals than it would kill. Hypothetically all individuals are assigned a number and drawn out of lottery when a donation is needed, and are expected to give up their lives to allow two or more people to live.
The article is a direct challenge to the belief that there is a difference between killing and letting die, and an exploration of the moral consequences that follow from this.
One or more of these assumptions can be proven false and invalidate the survival lottery thought experiment by proving that while killing and letting die can be determined as equal (hypothetically), the actual lives involved cannot be determined as equal or lives saved as greater than one life lost.
Thought experiment
A thought experiment or Gedankenexperiment considers some hypothesis, theory, or principle for the purpose of thinking through its consequences...
, proposed by the philosopher John Harris
John Harris (bioethicist)
John Harris, FRSA, FMedSci , is a British bioethicist and philosopher. He is the Lord Alliance Professor of Bioethics and Director of the Institute for Science, Ethics and Innovation at the University of Manchester. He was educated at the University of Kent and Balliol College, Oxford...
. The basis of the idea is to ask people to imagine if organ donation
Organ donation
Organ donation is the donation of biological tissue or an organ of the human body, from a living or dead person to a living recipient in need of a transplantation. Transplantable organs and tissues are removed in a surgical procedure following a determination, based on the donor's medical and...
were expected to save more individuals than it would kill. Hypothetically all individuals are assigned a number and drawn out of lottery when a donation is needed, and are expected to give up their lives to allow two or more people to live.
Arguments for
The argument for the survival lottery can be as follows:- Imagine that organ donation was perfect.
- There is no difference between killing and letting die.
- Given 1 and 2 we should adopt the Survival Lottery.
The article is a direct challenge to the belief that there is a difference between killing and letting die, and an exploration of the moral consequences that follow from this.
Assumptions the "survival lottery" relies on
The survival lottery relies on the following assumptions:- Each life (killed or allowed to die naturally) is of equal value.
- Two lives saved are of more value than one life killed to save them.
- Two lives saved would be completely cured, or be sufficiently cured as to show a quality of two lives greater than a healthy life killed to save them.
- Two lives saved would be able to live sufficiently long enough on the transplanted organs (staving off rejection and the original sickness causing their need for replacement) as to show a quantitative gain over a completely healthy (and presumable longer) life randomly chosen to be killed.
One or more of these assumptions can be proven false and invalidate the survival lottery thought experiment by proving that while killing and letting die can be determined as equal (hypothetically), the actual lives involved cannot be determined as equal or lives saved as greater than one life lost.
Sources
- The Survival Lottery, John Harris -In, Applied Ethics, Oxford Readings in Philosophy, ed. Peter Singer
- Harris, John (1975). "The survival lottery." Philosophy, 50: 81-87.