Bioethics: What Everyone Needs to Know ®
Rate it:
4%
Flag icon
together we have eighty-plus years of teaching bioethics—
5%
Flag icon
What Are the Philosophical Foundations of Bioethics?
5%
Flag icon
bioethics
5%
Flag icon
asking for the ethical principles that guide moral reasoning in bioethics and justify conclusions.
5%
Flag icon
What is “normative ethics”?
5%
Flag icon
Normative ethics,
5%
Flag icon
asks what makes a right act right, a wrong act wrong.
5%
Flag icon
empirical investigations,
Brendan  Lalor
Be sure to "get" the contrast between the ethical perspective and the empirical here.
5%
Flag icon
do not tell us whether people are correct and justified in their moral beliefs.
5%
Flag icon
moral judgments
Brendan  Lalor
As the following passages explain, moral judgments may be about 1. actions/policies (1a. obligations/permissions, 1b. supererogation, and 1c. protections) or 2. persons (character).
5%
Flag icon
actions,
5%
Flag icon
Obligations and permissions.
5%
Flag icon
Supererogatory actions.
6%
Flag icon
Moral rights.
6%
Flag icon
people and their character.
6%
Flag icon
virtue theory,
6%
Flag icon
What does a physician have to be to be a good doctor? Among other things, be honest, courageous, and empathetic.
6%
Flag icon
itself: How do we know what a virtuous person should do? How can one determine, for example, what really is the proper mean between the extremes of timidity and recklessness without assessing what action would be morally justified?
Brendan  Lalor
These are objections to virtue theory. Do you see how?
6%
Flag icon
What are some important moral theories for bioethics?
6%
Flag icon
Utilitarianism: consequences.
6%
Flag icon
maximizes the aggregate “utility” (subjective well-being)
6%
Flag icon
Kantian ethics: the inherent nature of the act.
6%
Flag icon
ethic of duties—
6%
Flag icon
Natural Law ethics: intentions and natural goods.
6%
Flag icon
natural goods
6%
Flag icon
How does utilitarian reasoning work?
6%
Flag icon
crucial clarifications
Brendan  Lalor
What are the five clarificafions?
7%
Flag icon
counter-examples—
Brendan  Lalor
What MAKES the following "counter-examples to utiltarianism"?
7%
Flag icon
(heart, lungs, two kidneys, and liver).
Brendan  Lalor
We get the idea. But: On the one hand, "One deceased organ donor can save up to eight lives! Two donated kidneys can free two patients from dialysis treatments. One donated liver can be split to go to two patients on the wait list. Two donated lungs mean another two patients are given a second chance, and a donated pancreas and donated heart are two more patients who will receive the gift of life." (https://www.pennmedicine.org/updates/blogs/transplant-update/2023/april/6-quick-facts-about-organ-donation) On the other hand, the five "vital organs" are sometimes enumerated as: the brain, the heart, the lungs, the kidneys, and the liver.
7%
Flag icon
But we shouldn’t sacrifice one person in this way to save four, should we?
Brendan  Lalor
Pay attention to the logic here. The reasoning is something like this: 1. Utlitarianism implies organ conscription would be ethical. 2. (We know) it's NOT the case that organ conscription would be ethical. 3. Therefore, utilitarianism is incorrect. Does this argument refute utilitarianism? Perhaps not, as utilitarians can respond defensively. But it at least counts as pressure against it.
7%
Flag icon
how can utilitarian reasoning account for our distinct reservations about deceiving someone in this way?
Brendan  Lalor
What is the reasoning against utilitarianism offered in this second counter-example?
7%
Flag icon
A strong informed consent requirement would seem to get in the way of maximizing benefit in situations where a physician or influential family member knows better.
Brendan  Lalor
What is the reasoning against utilitarianism offered in this third counter-example? And what, in the discussion that follows, is the proposed utilitarian response to the objection?
7%
Flag icon
What principles are featured in Kantian ethics?
8%
Flag icon
cheat on an exam
Brendan  Lalor
For Kant, how does this example illustrate the "contradiction in what one wills" that shows the act cannot be universalized and would therefore be unethical?
8%
Flag icon
creating one child to save another—
Brendan  Lalor
How does this example illustrate what S&M identify as an erroneous application of Kant's second principle (respect for persons' autonomy)? That is, why do they think respect is not violated in such cases?
8%
Flag icon
They were not using their new children merely as means.
8%
Flag icon
What does Natural Law ethics contribute to bioethics?
8%
Flag icon
four things are “natural goods”:
8%
Flag icon
any intentional, direct destruction of these goods is simply prohibited. It is always wrong to intentionally destroy a natural human good.
8%
Flag icon
One also intends the means
9%
Flag icon
the “doctrine of double effect” (DDE).
9%
Flag icon
Effects that are not intended, but only foreseen, allow an action to still be permissible if certain conditions are met.
9%
Flag icon
Using morphine in this way is morally permissible.
9%
Flag icon
Whether the DDE can be defended is highly debatable. From a consequentialist, utilitarian perspective, it cannot be:
Brendan  Lalor
So why do utilitarians reject DDE?
9%
Flag icon
What is the “principles approach” to bioethics?
9%
Flag icon
principlism)
9%
Flag icon
people confronting an issue in bioethics should consult four moral principles: nonmaleficence, benevolence, autonomy, and justice.
9%
Flag icon
when two or more of them conflict, one emerges as dominant in the actual context—
9%
Flag icon
Concluding thoughts
10%
Flag icon
attempting to discern which theory is correct may be left to ethical theorists
« Prev 1 3 9