Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKoali, Seeiso J.
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-24T11:10:57Z
dc.date.available2018-07-24T11:10:57Z
dc.date.issued2015-05
dc.identifier.citationOpen Journal of Philosophy, 2015, 5, 261-267en_US
dc.identifier.issn2163-9442
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2015.55033
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/2015
dc.description.abstractThis article normatively discusses two moral theories namely: Ubuntu and Deontology, with the aim of arguing against the practice of organ transplant trade. It is argued that this practice violates a rule of categorical imperative which states that human beings should not be used as the means, but always be treated as ends into themselves. Organ transplant trade also affects negatively the process of informed consent of vulnerable people who may overlook the risks in trading of organs and focus only on the monetary incentives. This article is based on non-empirical research which employs the method of critical and conceptual analysis with a review of existing literatures on the subject. Therefore, this article addresses the following question: do people have ownership of their bodily parts to an extent that they can autonomously sell them to make a living? This question is answered by concluding that the upholding of moral duties of human beings eliminates all human acts that violate the notion of human dignity.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherScientific Researchen_US
dc.subjectAutonomyen_US
dc.subjectDeontologyen_US
dc.subjectInformed Consenten_US
dc.subjectOrgan Transplant Tradeen_US
dc.subjectUbuntuen_US
dc.subjectVulnerabilityen_US
dc.titleOrgan Transplant Trade: A Moral Examinationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record