The American demand for assisted dying is rooted in a cultural obsession with control. But control, Sulmasy argues, is a philosophically bankrupt foundation: you can't control who your parents were, you can't avoid death, and you can't force someone to love you. A value system built on control excludes the three most important things in human life.
Where this was said
At 34:33 · chapter starts 31:10
Dubner pushes back on Sulmasy with the autonomy argument: if free will is a cornerstone of Catholic doctrine, how can the Church oppose the free choice to die? Sulmasy's answer is precise: free will is what makes morality possible — without it, there's no praise or blame, no ethics at all. But free will doesn't mean every choice is right; it means we are capable of choosing, and capable of being wrong [1] — Daniel Sulmasy "The American demand for assisted dying is rooted in a cultural obsession with control. But control, Sulmasy argues, is a philosophically ba…" 34:33 . The exchange escalates to Sulmasy's most memorable observation: American culture has elevated control to its highest value, but control can't account for the three most important human experiences — birth, death, and love. You can't choose your biological parents, you can't avoid death, and you can't force love without negating it. Sulmasy also raises the economics of the Canadian case: health economists were publishing financial savings analyses for MAID even before the ink on the court decision was dry. His colleague's counter: if your healthcare system doesn't provide good end-of-life care, fix the system — don't prescribe death as the cost-effective alternative.
Shortly after Canada's court ruling requiring MAID legalization, health economists were already publishing papers on how much the cash-strapped Canadian healthcare system would save. Sulmasy's counter: if your healthcare system isn't giving people good end-of-life care, fix the system — don't prescribe death.
More freedom doesn't produce more happiness — it produces more anxiety. Kierkegaard identified this 180 years ago: the more options you have, the more you feel the 'dizziness of freedom,' a paralytic unease at having to choose any single one. The freest generation in history is, by his prediction, exactly the most anxious.
Every person lives in constant tension between infinite possible selves and the finite, limited self they actually are. Tipping too far toward infinite possibility produces a loss of identity; too much confinement in the finite produces stagnation. Kierkegaard argued that this tension is never solved — only managed.
Standing outside a cold pool imagining reasons not to jump is the exact experience of pre-commitment anxiety. Once you jump, the shock passes and you wonder why you ever hesitated. The same mechanism governs every significant commitment in life — the dread is always on the outside, the relief on the inside.
Traditional societies had rites of passage that closed off childhood and opened adulthood. Modern society kept the in-between liminal phase but eliminated the ritual that resolved it. The result is 'emerging adulthood' — a decade or more stuck in the transition — engineered by rising education requirements, women entering the workforce, and delayed marriage.
When Mark Manson proposed to his wife, software he didn't know was running — the low-level assessment of sexual market value and other options — suddenly shut down. Commitment doesn't take freedom away. It trades optionality (freedom to do many things) for focus (freedom from distraction). John Dewey called these positive and negative freedom, and the latter is more powerful.
Mark Manson spent years as a location-independent digital nomad — always a new country, a new woman, a new venture. Then the diminishing returns kicked in: countries started feeling the same, dates felt identical, businesses all frustrated him. The cure wasn't more novelty. It was narrowing: one place, one person, one career.
Every meaningful commitment has a dip — an initial peak of excitement, a brutal trough of difficulty, and a second higher peak for those who push through. Institutions once kept people in the dip long enough to reach the other side. With infinite optionality and no institutions, everyone bails at the bottom and restarts the cycle of shallow first peaks.
Stage one — the aesthetic — is the default: chasing sensation, novelty, and keeping every door open. Stage two — the ethical — is learning to choose with eyes wide open, accepting the trade-offs. Stage three — the religious — is when a commitment becomes so total that it no longer feels like a choice. It just feels like who you are.
The ethical stage is rational commitment — you can explain your choices. The religious stage is when your commitment exceeds rational justification. You can't explain why. It just feels like it chose you. Kierkegaard called this the 'virtue of the absurd' — and it's represented not just in faith but in the entrepreneurs, artists, and athletes who can't imagine doing anything else.
We use essential and analytics cookies to run Vuci. To understand how the site is used: Privacy Policy.
Install Vuci on your phone
Add it to your home screen for a faster, app-like experience.
Install Vuci on your phone
Tap the Share button, then “Add to Home Screen”.
A new version is available
Reload to get the latest Vuci.