◆立岩 真也 1997/09/05 『私的所有論』，勁草書房，445+66p. ISBN-10: 4326601175 ISBN-13: 978-4326601172 6300 ［amazon］／［kinokuniya］ ※
◆立岩 真也 2013/05/20 『私的所有論 第２版』，生活書院・文庫版，973p. ISBN-10: 4865000062 ISBN-13: 978-4865000061 1800+ ［amazon］／［kinokuniya］ ※
◆Tateiwa, Shinya(立岩 真也) 2016 On Private Property, English Version, Kyoto Books
chap. 5 The Problem Of Drawing Lines
"There is an important issue that arises when this topic is addressed in the way I have laid out in Chapter 4. What kinds of beings must not be eliminated or violated? What is the boundary or domain of this set of beings? If we say that everything is part of the other and that the existence of the other must be respected, does this not seem to indicate that we should treat everything equally and without discrimination? In this chapter I consider these questions and the issues surrounding them. This includes considering how we should think about assigning humanity special status or privileges and attempts to answer the question of when life should be considered to begin. This is a fundamental question in the field of "bioethics," but here I take a different approach from what has been said in this "field" in the past."
5.2 There are no Lines, but Lines are Drawn
5.2.1 The Impossibility of Drawing Lines
The above having been said, the problem of demarcation arises once again. If everything is part of what is other, and if we say that the other is to be accepted and affirmed, would this not also indicate that we must treat everything indiscriminately? For example, if we do not define the other as possessing consciousness, does this not mean there is no longer any fundamental difference between what is human and what is not human? We have also seen that we do not distinguish the other based on biological species; the other cannot be defined as human. There is therefore no absolute distinction between what is human and what is not human in terms of who or what we may kill and who or what we must not. The other is furthermore not even limited to living beings.
In practice, however, we do in fact distinguish between which beings may be killed and which must not be killed in terms of what is human and what is not human. Is this kind of distinction not indeed inevitable?