Professor Gert's Views on Death

In this paper I analyze and critique Gert's views on death, tracing the evolution of his ideas throughout his career. I argue that the definitions-criteria-tests framework that he and his colleagues introduced, along with their approach to death as a biological phenomenon to be understood in biological terms, are immensely important and largely correct. However, there is no scientific justification for claiming that brain-dead bodies are biologically dead bodies. Furthermore, continuing to use the language of "death" to describe such bodies as a matter of public policy constitutes paternalism. I use Gert's analysis of the justification of paternalism to argue that the paternalism inherent in the language of "death" is unjustified.