Ulterior Motives

Much of the venom from the left on the issue of Terry Schiavo (not to say that there isn't venom from the right as well, but that's a topic for another post) seems to based on the idea that the left is standing up for mere principle, while those who want Terry Schiavo on a feeding tube are motivated really by ulterior motives such as religious concerns. Not that in all cases the motives are ulterior, but rather that any secular argument by the pro-feeding tube people is a decoy for their real, religious motivations. For example read this.

Of course, we are to believe that the side who wants to let Terry die is motivated by their good hearts and their desire to obey her wishes.

Obviously, in formal logic arguing by ad hominem, including arguments from motivation, is fallacious. But as Thrasymachus points out, in the real world where we have to trust other people's interpretations to be unbiased and honest, and where analyzing and determining all the facts ourselves is impossible (how many people commenting on the case have personally gone through all of the data on Terry Schiavo?), it is necessary to determine the reliability of other people's arguments based to an extent on how much we trust the people. (Obviously, a full scientific investigation is better, if you trust the scientists doing it, but sometimes it is difficult to have a full investiagtion that you can be confident in when the issue is controversial).

In that vein, it is important to note that those who want the feedinfg tube pulled may have an ulterior motive for their desires as well, beyond any concern for Ms. Schiavo or either of her families.

First, for many in the scientific community, there is a great advantage to being able to use living human organisms in research (I use the term human organims to refer to any collection of human cells that was once a sentient human being or has the capacity to become one, or that could have become one, so the term would include zygotes, persistent vegetables, and brain-dead people). Therefore, there is likely to be a motivation by many to define as many human organisms as possible as not being truly persons (i.e. a human organism but not a human being).

Secondly, as Steve Sailer points out, people lingering around tends to decrease hte amount of inheritance. People cheering on the removal of the feeding tube may, in many cases, be hoping to set a precedent if their parents one day threaten to squander their inheritance by not dying in a timely manner.

Which is not to say that there aren't honest people on both sides as well.

But there seems to me to be too much concentration on the motives of the pro-feeding tube people and not enough on the anti-feeding tube people.

That is all.