Given a definition of “suicide,” utilitarianism should specify when, if ever, suicide is morally right. When is a person morally permitted to perform an act of suicide? According to utilitarianism, if there is nothing else the person can do, that would lead to better consequences. This simple observation is the beginning of a utilitarian examination of suicide. Hedonistic utilitarianism competes with other forms urging us to maximize the satisfaction of preferences or items on some objective list, rather than happiness. This may affect when suicide is morally right. And some have claimed that unhappiness weighs heavier in the moral calculus than happiness. This means that pessimism needs to be assessed in the present context. And what about the negative and positive “external” effects when an act of suicide is committed? There are also questions in applied ethics relating to suicide that a utilitarian has to confront. Should physician assisted suicide be legally permitted? Should society in general and psychiatry in particular attempt to stop people from killing themselves? If so, by which means? Should people with a stable wish to die be given an opportunity to donate their organs when they perform an act of suicide? A special instance of suicide is politically motivated suicides, such as suicide bombings. If the notion of suicide is broad enough to include these, are they ever morally permitted or even obligatory? What has utilitarianism to say when people “gamble” with their lives?

Provides a unique political solution in the form of an enlightened global despotismIntroduces global despotism as the first step toward global democracyAddresses also what can be done if we fail to avert global heating and/or nuclear war 

Globala existentiella hot kan endast hanteras genom globala politiska institutioner, en världsregering. Kan en global demokrati etableras omedelbart? Nej, den globala demokrati är ett långsiktigt mål att sträva mot, när väl världsregeringen är på plats och kan avvärja de mest pressande existentiella globala hoten. Är det viktigt att mänskligheten överlever? Ja, är svaret i ett kapitel ägnat åt frågan. Tänk om vi misslyckas. Den moraliska betydelsen av detta utreds också.

We should distinguish between negative medical interventions (intended to cure disease), positive interventions (intended to improve, within the normal range, functioning) and enhancement (where a person is pushed beyond species normal functioning). It seems that, within medicine in general, even if these distinctions can make a difference with respect to who shall pay for the service, they make no principled difference as to whether the services can be provided. However, in sports medicine, they do make a difference. In this chapter, I investigate what kind of difference. Negative interventions seem to be unproblematic, positive interventions problematic, and enhancement forbidden.