Analogical Reasoning and Easy Rescue Cases


The purpose of this article is to determine whether analogical reasoning can supply a basis for believing that we have a moral obligation to rescue strangers. The paper will focus on donating cadaver organs. I construct a moral analogical argument involving an easy rescue case and organ donation. Various alleged relevant differences between the cases are examined and rejected. Finally, what I cal l “the ownership dilemma” is introduced and I conclude that this dilemma is inescapable. Thus, analogical reasoning, however convincing it might appear, is virtually worthless as a strategy of rationality persuading people that they have a duty to donate blood, cadaver organs, or, more generally, a duty to give up any property to aid strangers

Download options


    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,766

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

47 (#245,123)

6 months
1 (#386,989)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Similar books and articles

Analogical Reasoning and Modeling in the Sciences.Paulo Abrantes - 1999 - Foundations of Science 4 (3):237-270.
The Problem with Rescue Medicine.N. S. Jecker - 2013 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (1):64-81.
Liability for Failing to Rescue.TheodoreM Benditt - 1982 - Law and Philosophy 1 (3):391 - 418.
The Bystander's Duty to Rescue in Jewish Law.Aaron Kirschenbaum - 1980 - Journal of Religious Ethics 8 (2):204 - 226.
Facilitation and Analogical Transfer in the THOG Task.Cynthia Koenig & Richard Griggs - 2004 - Thinking and Reasoning 10 (4):355 – 370.