Oleh : Maya Erisna

Sumber :
1. Chrisman, J. 2015. Autonomy in Moral and Political Philosophy. available on :
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/autonomy-moral/#AutJusDem (accessed on
August, 22nd, 2018)
2. https://www.iep.utm.edu/aut-norm/
3. Ashcroft, R.E, et al. 2015. Principles of Health Care Ethics: Second Edition.
Wiley

1. The concept of Autonomy

There are several different conceptions of autonomy, all of which are loosely based
upon the core notions of self-government or self-determination, but which differ
considerably in the details.
a) Definition of autonomy
Autonomy is the principle of respect for persons, and of individual self-
determination consistent with that principle. As most commonly defined, autonomy points
in the direction of personal liberty of action in accordance with a plan chosen only by
oneself. In Kant's formulation, which reconciles with some difficulty with our usual
individualistic views, autonomy is fully realized only when one governs oneself in
accordance with universally valid moral principles.
A clear example of this is in the field of medical ethics, where decisions must
respect four ethical principles: autonomy, justice, benevolence and inflicting the least harm.
When these principles clash with one another, different communities have different norms
on which takes precedence.
One of the most practical applications of autonomy in ethics is through the idea of
informed consent, a concept used from law to medicine, research and sex. Informed consent
means you can’t do something to someone unless they give you permission and they can’t
give you permission unless they understand what you’re going to do – including all the
possible consequences.
 b) Moral Autonomy

Moral autonomy is associated with the work of Kant, and is also referred to as
‘autonomy of the will’ or ‘Kantian autonomy.’ This form of autonomy consists in the
capacity of the will of a rational being to be a law to itself, independently of the influence
of any property of objects of volition. More specifically, an autonomous will is said to be
free in both a negative and a positive sense. The will is negatively free in that it operates
entirely independently, including all contingent empirical determinations associated with
appetite, desire-satisfaction, or happiness. The will is positively free in that it can act in
accordance with its own law. Kant’s notion of autonomy of the will thus involves, as
Andrews Reath has written, “not only a capacity for choice that is motivationally
independent, but a lawgiving capacity that is independent of determination by external
influence and is guided by its own internal principle–in other words, by a principle that is
constitutive of lawgiving” (Reath 2006). Now, because the lawgiving of the autonomous
will contains no content given by contingent empirical influences, this lawgiving must be
universal; and because these laws are the product of practical reason, they are necessary.
the products of the autonomous will are universal and necessary practical laws–that is,
moral laws. It is thus by virtue of our autonomy that we are capable of morality, and we are
moral to the extent that we are autonomous. It is for this reason that Kant’s conception of
autonomy is described as moral autonomy. Moral autonomy refers to the capacity of
rational agents to impose upon themselves–to legislate for themselves–the moral law.
c) Conceptual Variations

The variety of contexts in which the concept of autonomy functions has suggested to many
that there are simply a number of different conceptions, and that the word simply refers to
different elements in each of those contexts (Arpaly 2004). Feinberg has claimed that there
are at least four different meanings of “autonomy” in moral and political philosophy: the
capacity to govern oneself, the actual condition of self-government, a personal ideal, and a
set of rights expressive of one's sovereignty over oneself (Feinberg 1989). So a theory of
autonomy is simply a construction of a concept aimed at capturing the general sense of
“self-rule” or “self-government” (ideas which obviously admit of their own vagaries) and
which can be used to support principles or policies the theory attempts to justify.The idea of
self-rule contains two components: the independence of one's deliberation and choice from
manipulation by others, and the capacity to rule oneself (see Dworkin 1989, 61f and
Arneson 1991).
3. The Normative Roles of Autonomy

autonomy plays an important normative role in a variety of philosophical areas.

a. Autonomy in Ethical Theory

Autonomy is referenced in a number of key ways in ethical theory:

1) Autonomy serves as a ground for the claims that persons have dignity and
inherently deserve basic moral respect
Autonomy (or the capacity for autonomy) has been referenced by some
philosophers as that property of human beings by virtue of which they possess
inherent dignity and therefore inherently deserve to be treated with basic moral
respect
2) Autonomy is said to have a value that grounds the claim that persons deserve to be
told the truth
Proper respect for persons as autonomous thus requires a commitment to
truthfulness. It has been argued, however, that one may respect and value the
autonomy of another while deceiving them at the same time (Buss 2005).
3) Autonomy is referenced as a fundamental principle of ethics in Kantian deontology
The corresponding Formula of Autonomy could then be expressed as an imperative
in this way: act so that the maxims you will could be the legislation of universal law.
According to this formula, we should act according to principles that express the
autonomy of the will. This formulation is important, firstly because it suggests that
Kant conceived autonomy as a normative principle (and not merely as a condition
of the will that makes morality possible), and secondly because it further reinforces
Kant’s claim that humans, as autonomous law-givers, are the source of the universal
law that guarantees their freedom and hence marks them out as possessing inherent
dignity (see Reath 2006).
4) Autonomy is commonly viewed as a key component of human well-being.
The normative importance of autonomy has been described as being associated
primarily with deontology, the claim that autonomy is a core component of well-
being shows that it can play a key role in consequentialist moral theories as well.
Indeed, as will be discussed in greater detail below (section 4), although most
defenses of the principle of respect for autonomy are deontological in nature, it is
also possible to defend the principle on consequentialist grounds. From this point of
view, it can be argued that autonomy deserves respect because respecting autonomy
is reliably conducive to well-being.
5) Autonomy is defended as an important virtue
 The autonomous person is a person possessing a constellation of widely desirable
qualities such as self-control, self-knowledge, rationality and reflective maturity. To
be autonomous is to be self-governing; to be free from domination by foreign
influences over one’s character and values; to ‘be one’s own person’. Following
from this, it is claimed by some that autonomy is a great virtue to possess - one
which constitutes an important part of human flourishing
6) Autonomy is said to be necessary for moral responsibility
Persons are certainly morally responsible for their autonomous actions, they are also
morally responsible for a wider range of actions as well.
7) Autonomy is said to have a value that grounds the claim that autonomy-based
demands are worthy of special respect