A Biological Theory of Death: Characterization, Justification, and Implications

• Authors: Nair-Collins Michael
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

John P. Lizza has long been a major figure in the scholarly literature on criteria for death. His searching and penetrating critiques of the dominant biological paradigm, and his defense of a theory of death of the person as a psychophysical entity, have both significantly advanced the literature. In this special issue, Lizza reinforces his critiques of a strictly biological approach. In my commentary, I take up Lizza’s challenge regarding a biological concept of death. He is certainly right to point out that science is not value-free; however, this does not imply that there cannot be a characterization of biological death that can be shown to be superior to other concepts. After characterizing and justifying such a theory of biological death, I show that patients who meet the diagnostic criteria for brain death are unequivocally biologically alive. However, with respect to concepts of personhood and related ideas (as opposed to biology), I urge the acceptance of a pluralism of such concepts for matters of public policy.

Keywords

EN

Lizza; death; definition of death; brain death; neurological criteria for determining death

• Publisher: Instytut Filozofii - Uniwersytet Jagielloński
• Journal: Diametros
• Year: 2018
• Issue: 55
• Pages: 27-43

Dates

published

2018-03

Contributors

author

Nair-Collins Michael

• Florida State University College of Medicine

References

• Banfalvi G. (1991), “Evolution of Osmolyte Systems,” Biochemical Education 19 (3): 136–139.
• Brock D. (1987), “Truth or consequences: the role of philosophers in policy-making,” Ethics 97 (4): 786–791.
• Condic M.L. (2016), “Determination of Death: A Scientific Perspective on Biological Integration,” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 41 (3): 257–278.
• DeGrazia D. (2005), Human Identity and Bioethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Hall J.E. (2016), Guyton and Hall Textbook of Medical Physiology, 13th ed., Elsevier, Philadelphia.
• Khan S.S., Singer B.D., Vaughan D.E. (2017), “Molecular and physiological manifestations and measurement of aging in humans,” Aging Cell 16 (4): 624–633.
• Lakatos I. (1970), “Falsification and the methodology of research program,” [in:] Crticism and the Growth of Knowledge, I. Lakatos, A. Musgrave (eds), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Lizza J.P. (2006), Persons, Humanity, and the Definition of Death, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (MD).
• Lizza J.P. (2018), “Defining Death: Beyond Biology,” Diametros 55: 1–19.
• Lock M. (2004), “Living cadavers and the calculation of death,” Body & Society 10 (2–3): 135–152.
• Moschella M. (2016), “Deconstructing the brain disconnection-brain death analogy and clarifying the rationale for the neurological criterion of death,” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 41 (3): 279–299.
• Nair-Collins M. (2013), “Brain Death, Paternalism, and the Language of ‘Death’,” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 23 (1): 53–104.
• Nair-Collins M. (2015), “Taking Science Seriously in the Definition of Death,” Hastings Center Report 45 (6): 38–48.
• Nair-Collins M. (2015), “Laying Futility to Rest,” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 40 (5): 554–583.
• Nair-Collins M. (2017), “Can the Brain-Dead Be Harmed or Wronged? On the Moral Status of Brain Death and its Implications for Organ Transplantation,” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 27 (4): 525–559.
• Nair-Collins M., Miller F.G. (2017), “Do the ‘Brain Dead’ Merely Appear to be Alive?” Journal of Medical Ethics 43 (11): 747–753.
• Popper K. (1963), Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
• President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1981), Defining Death: A Report on the Medical, Legal and Ethical Issues in the Determination of Death, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington (DC).
• President’s Council on Bioethics (2008), Controversies in the Determination of Death: A White Paper by the President’s Council on Bioethics, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington (DC).

Notes

EN

Special Topic – Defining Death: Beyond Biology

PL

Temat specjalny – Definiując śmierć: poza biologią

Identifiers

DOI

10.13153/diam.1174