There is a worldwide shortage of organ donations that is desperate. There is even talk of the "most urgent medical problem in our country". And everyone considers this to be wrong, just as everyone considers it to be right to donate organs, even if they do not do so themselves. Because patients on waiting lists are dying, the question has arisen as to whether the ability to donate organs should become an obligation. Or are organ donations a matter of supererogatory deed that is praiseworthy but not morally binding? I will explicitly reject this thesis on the basis of Emmanuel Lévinas' ethics. Lévinas has powerfully discussed the suffering of the Other and the vulnerability which we ourselves receive through this suffering. His ethics finds its epicentre in the obligation to sacrifice one's own food and even one's own skin. By means of the prominent philosophy of Emmanuel Lévinas it is possible to defend the thesis that it is an obligation to donate organs.

Enthalten in:
Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik; 2013/3 Kommentare, Studien, Berichte, Dokumentationen, Diskussionen, Rezensionen, Bibliographie (2013)

---

Serie / Reihe: Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik

Personen: Wirth, Mathias

Schlagwörter: Ethik Lévinas, Emmanuel Organspende