Review Of "Why Suicide Is Amoral: A Philosophical Account" By R. Gaier

Gaier (Gannon Univ.) argues that suicide is amoral because agents are unable to exercise “deliberative agency” (as they lack reasons for what they do and cannot act on them) or “moral agency” (as their relational knowledge is compromised; i.e., lacking a sense of belonging). To say that suicide is amoral is to say that moral categories, including moral permissibility, do not apply. Thus, suicide is an act, but no more an action than a toddler throwing a tantrum comes within the moral domain. But how should suicide be defined? Gaier is inclined towards a more expansive account that permits her to include physician assisted suicide (PAS) and the soldier who throws his body on a grenade to save his comrades. Interestingly, Gaier doesn’t discuss the most famous case in philosophy: that of Socrates. Arguably, Socrates didn’t lack deliberative or moral agency either. This thoughtfully argued book provides deep insight into the most typical cases—namely, those suffering profound moral depression—but less well in other cases. For example, her thesis mandates, and she accepts, that neither the soldier nor someone who chooses PAS deserve any moral praise or admiration. The book is well researched and worth taking seriously, but this reviewer believes that Gaier overgeneralizes. Summing Up: Recommended. General readers through faculty; professionals.

Publication Details

Journal
Works - Scholarship, Research, & Creative Expression (Swarthmore College)
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.237316
Primary Topic
Ethics in medical practice
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Review Of "Why Suicide Is Amoral: A Philosophical Account" By R. Gaier

Works - Scholarship, Research, & Creative Expression (Swarthmore College)
Ethics in medical practice
article

Review Of "Why Suicide Is Amoral: A Philosophical Account" By R. Gaier

article en

Abstract

Gaier (Gannon Univ.) argues that suicide is amoral because agents are unable to exercise “deliberative agency” (as they lack reasons for what they do and cannot act on them) or “moral agency” (as their relational knowledge is compromised; i.e., lacking a sense of belonging). To say that suicide is amoral is to say that moral categories, including moral permissibility, do not apply. Thus, suicide is an act, but no more an action than a toddler throwing a tantrum comes within the moral domain. But how should suicide be defined? Gaier is inclined towards a more expansive account that permits her to include physician assisted suicide (PAS) and the soldier who throws his body on a grenade to save his comrades. Interestingly, Gaier doesn’t discuss the most famous case in philosophy: that of Socrates. Arguably, Socrates didn’t lack deliberative or moral agency either. This thoughtfully argued book provides deep insight into the most typical cases—namely, those suffering profound moral depression—but less well in other cases. For example, her thesis mandates, and she accepts, that neither the soldier nor someone who chooses PAS deserve any moral praise or admiration. The book is well researched and worth taking seriously, but this reviewer believes that Gaier overgeneralizes. Summing Up: Recommended. General readers through faculty; professionals.

Works - Scholarship, Research, & Creative Expression (Swarthmore College)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 36%
Ethics in medical practice
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.