1. (T/F) In Anna's story, why did she wish not to be resuscitated?
2. Which theory has been dominant in bioethics and often used by many health professionals?
3. In deontological theory, what is the difference between hypothetical and categorical imperatives?
4. What ethical principle (and whose), in the name of rational consistency, absolute dutifulness, and mutual respect, "requires unconditional obedience and overrides our preferences and desires" with respect to things like lying, for example?
5. What would Kant say about Tuskegee, or about the murderer "at our door"?
6. What more do we want from a moral theory than Kant gives us?
7. What is the distinctive question in virtue ethics?
8. What Greek philosopher was one of the earliest exponents of virtue ethics?
9. What is the Harm Principle, and who was its author?
10. Name one of the Four Principles in Beauchamp and Childress's theories on biomedical ethics?
2. Which theory has been dominant in bioethics and often used by many health professionals?
3. In deontological theory, what is the difference between hypothetical and categorical imperatives?
4. What ethical principle (and whose), in the name of rational consistency, absolute dutifulness, and mutual respect, "requires unconditional obedience and overrides our preferences and desires" with respect to things like lying, for example?
5. What would Kant say about Tuskegee, or about the murderer "at our door"?
6. What more do we want from a moral theory than Kant gives us?
7. What is the distinctive question in virtue ethics?
8. What Greek philosopher was one of the earliest exponents of virtue ethics?
9. What is the Harm Principle, and who was its author?
10. Name one of the Four Principles in Beauchamp and Childress's theories on biomedical ethics?
[Premonition...]
11. What was Dr. Hosea's diagnostic style? (And of what classic Greek philosopher might it remind you?)
12. What misleading practice of self-promotion did doctors of orthopedic medicine engage in?
13. How did Dr. Dean learn to persuade elected officials to finance disease control?
14. What was the root of the CDC's reluctance to support Dr. Dean's decisions?
15. What famous ethical problem did the Casa Dorinda mudslide resemble?
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
- In Anna's story, do you find yourself more concerned with the specifying and insisting on the respective duties of Anna, her physician, and the ethics committee dealing with her DNR request, or with its consequences?
- Do you consider yourself more an ethical consequentialist/utilitarian, pragmatist, deontologist, virtue ethicist, or none of the above? Is it possible to be ethically responsible without first clarifying and claiming your own theoretical ethical commitments?
- Do you agree with Peter Singer that the ethical choice which best serves the goal of minimizing pain and suffering requires ending lives?
- Is a felicific calculus such as Jeremy Bentham proposed possible, or practical?
- Would life in Huxley's Brave New World really be nightmarish and dystopian, if universal happiness were its result?
- Kant's categorical imperative requires always treating individuals respectfully, as ends in themselves and never as means to any other social or collective good. Can you imagine any scenario in which it would be ethically correct to violate that imperative, in the name of medical progress or social welfare?
- Is virtue ethics "elitist and utopian" in its quest to articulate the conditions of a good life and death for all? Are virtues and vices culturally relative? 36-7
1. Anna suffered a tragic motor accident and became paralyzed from the neck down, resulting in total, round-the-clock care from her husband, children, and hired nurses. Anna's former hobbies and enjoyments (hiking, reading, acting, etc.) were stolen from her suddenly, so when given a choice, she decided to deny any resuscitation. She had retained the quantity of her life, but the quality of the remaining life in front of her was an imprisoned one, one where she wouldn't be able to live as she had before. Coupled with excruciating and unyielding phantom pains, Anna decided she did not want her life to be rescued should she ever have a cardiac or respiratory arrest episode.
ReplyDelete2. Hypothetical imperatives are what we should do if we want a certain goal; Campbell gives the example of wanting to be in shape and healthy, and the means to achieve this state involve exercise and healthy eating. Categorical imperatives are more unconditioned obedience; they overrides our comfort/desires in order to follow your duty; the example given by Campbell is Anna choosing to remain on life support against her wishes, knowing that she was completing her moral obligation.
ReplyDelete8. One of the earliest proclaimers of virtue ethics was Socrates, It was further taught by Plato and Aristotle. I also believe this helped in the formation of the Hippocratic oath by the Pythagoras cult using the name of Hippocrates since it held sway over the medical field at the time of it's creation. The Hippocratic oath promotes virtuous behavior among physicians, although now predominately outdated by other medical oaths. This raises the question as to whether virtue ethics still belongs in medicine, for a physician can be virtuous but not hold the health and welfare of the patient in mind. Or he may be so virtuous that the physician may see any research that does not directly benefit the patient is not necessary, as seen in the arguments after the Nuremberg trials.
ReplyDeleteWould life in Huxley's Brave New World really be nightmarish and dystopian, if universal happiness were its result?
ReplyDeleteI would say it depends on what constitutes happiness. For the main character, who was in the upper echelon of society it was clear that he was not happy. So now that not everyone is not happy this defeats the original statement that everyone is happy. Also what makes happiness desirable, Happiness alone does not determine whether a life has been fulfilling, or loving, or good in any sense. To be happy does not mean to live a meaningful life, far too many people have lived miserably and suffered every step of the way, yet their lives were meaningful. Taking away free will will never create a desirable outcome, so yes Brave New World would be a hellish dystopia.
6. What more do we want from a moral theory than Kant gives us?
ReplyDeleteWe want a moral theory that considers emotion, not just reason. Kant’s concept of an “iron-clad rational duty” seems good at the surface. However, having an unwavering set of principles (e.g. not lying) overlooks the context in which events occur (e.g. white lies, lying to save others, etc.). It’s appealing to think that making an ethical decision could be as “simple” as knowing your duty. Ethical dilemmas in the real world require more.
I suppose this could bring up questions like, “Is it always unethical to steal?” Kant might say, “Yes, no matter what. For what would society be if everyone was allowed to steal?” But what if you had children and the only way for them to survive was if you stole food. It seems like stealing for survival would be different than a white-collar crime that’s just for personal financial gain. Kant might say that each was unethical because each person stole. Although he might also say that there’s a duty to provide for one’s children. I don’t know how he might resolve such a situation though.
14. What was the root of the CDC's reluctance to support Dr. Dean's decisions?
ReplyDeleteFear. The CDC was too worried about being blamed that they couldn’t make any decisions, much less support Dr. Dean’s. This is unfortunate since they are supposed to be the leader in disease control within the United States (it’s literally in their name!). Leaders are supposed to make tough decisions including dealing with the consequences of those actions. It might be different if the CDC was trying to intervene in a matter that a county health officer would better understand at a local level. Since Dr. Dean asked for their advice, they should’ve been more willing to give concrete guidance or at the very least support.
12. I believe the misleading practice of self promotion that doctors of orthopedic medicine took place in was they would put on their business card "specialist in orthopedic medicine" when they were not actually trained as orthopedists.
ReplyDelete15. The ethical problem the mudslide resembled was the train that would either kill 1 person or 5 people, and if that 1 is going to die anyways should you kill them to harvest their organs.
3. In deontological theory, what is the difference between hypothetical and categorical imperatives?
ReplyDeleteDeontology works with trying to understand our moral duties. A hypothetical imperative, as described by Kant, just deals with what path should be taken to achieve some end goal. Whether one actually follows through with this is their choice. However, a categorical imperative requires that the person follows through regardless of their desires or preferences. In this way, a categorical imperative is a moral obligation that must be followed and is based on reason.
4. What ethical principle (and whose), in the name of rational consistency, absolute dutifulness, and mutual respect, "requires unconditional obedience and overrides our preferences and desires" with respect to things like lying, for example?
ReplyDeleteKant's principle of a categorical imperative "requires unconditional obedience." Following through with something that is a categorical imperative, such as not lying, is a must, and this overrides what a person's preferences are. Just because it might be easier or more preferable to lie doesn't mean that you can, because it is a categorical imperative. In fact, you must tell the truth even if it is painful because that is your moral obligation.
5. What would Kant say about Tuskegee, or about the murderer "at our door"?
ReplyDeleteKant would say that what was done to the participants of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study was very morally wrong. Kant believed in always telling the truth, and the participants in the study suffered because they were lied to about what was being done to them. The U.S. Public Health Service told participants that they had "bad blood," and they also withheld penicillin from the participants even when it was a widely available treatment choice. This blatant dishonesty on the part of the USPHS and all involved people directly opposes Kant's views.
Kant gives the murderer at the door scenario as a (somewhat extreme) example as to how far our truthfulness should go. His scenario deals with a murderer chasing someone who has hidden in your house. If the murderer knocks on your door and asks for the person, should you tell her where her victim is? Kant says that you should because her victim might have already escaped through a back window in your house and telling the murderer that the victim isn't in your house might actually set her in the victim's direction. Kant argues that we must always bind ourselves to the truth, and defend the victim from the killer if need be.
More premonition questions:
ReplyDelete1) According to the CDC, by 2016 which infectious disease was killing more Americans than all the other infectious diseases put together.
2) Preventing infections was all about creating what?