Biomedical Ethics PHIL 315
Popular in Course
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
This 19 page Class Notes was uploaded by Lily O'Keefe Sr. on Tuesday October 13, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PHIL 315 at Longwood University taught by Scott Senn in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 14 views. For similar materials see /class/222426/phil-315-longwood-university in PHIL-Philosophy at Longwood University.
Reviews for Biomedical Ethics
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/13/15
Fact the way things are were or will be Statement an accurate or inaccurate description of a fact or facts Either true or false Belief opinion accepting that a statement is true Feelingsemotionsattitudes undergoing an experience of some kind Neither true nor false Unicorn realism there are statements beliefs and feelings about unicorns There are facts about unicorns which are INDEPENDENT of statements beliefs and feelings Unicorn antirealism there are statements beliefs and feelings about unicorns Aside from that there are no facts about unicorns argument in favor of moral anti realism premise 1 People have different moral beliefs and feelings premise 2 If premise number one is true then that means that the conclusion is true conclusion There are no moral facts independent of statements beliefs and feelings 9192011 Morals vs Morality o Morals people s beliefs and feelings about morality o Morality the actual moral rightness or wrongness ofan action Makes sense to reject moral antirealism because Examples Child abuse rape slavery torturing innocent people or animals morally wrong regardless of feelings and beliefs Accept Moral realism Document 6 0 Not all questions of right and wrong have to do with morality So the same action can be morally right but wrong in another sense and vice versa for example military victory Right to blow up cities to win a war but wrong with respect to morality right to keep child on a leash to keep out of harm Morally wrong 92111 Noonan reading Stance self defense in which mother would die without it is the only situation in which an abortion is morally right Some key points crucial question 0 how do you determine the humanity ofa being 0 Human being vs a collection of cells 0 At what point between conception and birth does humanity begin His view a person human being begins at conception Uses these words interchangeably person human being Different theories Theory of personhood viability theory A fetus is a person if and only if it is viable viable capable of living outside the womb roughly 24 weeks Noonan s reasons for rejecting this 0 The viability of the fetus depends on the extent of its anatomical and functional development Moreover different racial groups have different ages at which their fetuses are viable Noonan s argument from different rates of maturity o Premise 1 If theory is true then there is no one standard time that marks the beginning of personhood for everyone 0 Premise 2 There is one standard time that marks the beginning of personhood for everyone 0 Therefore viability theory is false gives no reason to accept premise 2 Kind of a weak argument if no reason is given to accept premise 2 Why accept the conclusion Argument 2 Argument from dependence o Premise 1 An individual human of 3 years of age is a person 0 Premise 2 If viability theory is true then an individual human 3 years of age isn t a person viable 0 Therefore viability theory is false confusion as to the definition of viable viable not dependent on another person Premise 2 is false Argument 3 o Premise 1 if viability theory is true then personhood is dependent on the level of technology 0 Premise 2 personhood isn t dependent on the level of technology 0 Therefore viability theory is false Noonan s argument for human rights Premise 1 Every human zygote embryo and fetus is a human being Premise 2 If 1 then every human zygote embryo and fetus has the same moral rights as every human being Premise 3 if every human zygote embryo and fetus has the same rights as every human being then 4 Therefore abortion is morally wrong except in quotself defensequot 4 92611 Noonan s argument for human rights Premise 1 Every human conceptus is a human being Premise 2 If 1 then every human conceptus has all the same moral rights as every human being Premise 3 If every human conceptus has all the same moral rights as every human being the 4 Therefore 4 Abortion is morally wrong except in quotself defensequot Person P has a right to X P is allowed to do have X Person P has a right to X P should be allowed to do have X Noonan s self defense principle Violating a person s moral right to life is morally ok and only doing so is necessary to save your own life 7 assumed for argument to work Argument for the human genetic code Every human conceptus has human DNA 2 If every human conceptus has human DNA then every human conceptus is a human being Therefore 3 Every human conceptus is a human being 92811 quotOnce conceived the being was recognized as man because he had man39s potential since the cnceptus has the potential It ALREADY is a human being Argument for humanity from potential premise l A human conceptus has the potential to be a human being Premise 2 If a human conceptus has the potential to be a human being then a human conceptus IS a human being Therefore 3 A human conceptus IS a human being counter examples an acorn has potential to become an oak tree under the right circumstances but it is not an oak tree Pancake batter has the potential to become pancakes under the right conditions but it is not a pancake Potential is not enough to say it IS something MAYBE Argument for abortion is morally wrong because 1 A human conceptus will possibly develop into a human baby liVing outside the womb 2 Ifl then 3 Abortion is morally wrong 9N noonan would probably reject this argument as well because An egg or sperm cell has a chance at developing but it is not morally wrong to kill sperm or egg cell If this argument held then it would be immoral to kill a sperm or egg cell On page 3 Not possibility that he finds important It s probability 1 A human conceptus has an 80 probability of developing into a human baby living outside the womb 2 If 1 then 3 3 Abortion is morally wrong except in quotself defense 10311 Thomson Paper Her View is abortion morally right In certain circumstances yes Pro choice vs pro life vague unhelpful terms What Thomson takes for granted Assume for the sake of argument 0 The conceptus is a person 0 The conceptus has a moral right to life Argument she thinks are incorrect 1 The conceptus moral right to life outweighs the pregnant woman s right to decide what happens into her body 2 If 1 then 3 Therefore 3 Abortion is morally wrong 5 What if someone said 1 The violinists right to life outweighs your moral right to decide what happens in amp to your body 2 If 1 then 3 3 Therefore 3 Disconnection from the violinist is morally wrong Obviously wrong so why accept the first one Passages p53 smith and jones example P58 burglar case P 62 good Samaritan END TEST 1 MATERIAL 101711 Responsibility view It s morally wrong to prevent the conceptus from using pregnant woman s body in all cases where the pregnancy is the result of the woman s voluntary and knowing actions consented sexual intercourse The pregnant woman s voluntary and knowing actions result in the conceptus using her body 9 The pregnant woman is partly responsible for the conceptus using her body 9 The conceptus then has a moral right to use the pregnant woman s body This means its morally wrong to prevent the burglar from using the stuff in your house Not very clear Don t have to kill the burglar to get him out Also burglar and conceptus have differing intentions We are not morally obligated to be good Samaritans 2 If we are morally obligated to go through with a pregnancy that is the result of our voluntary and knowing actions then we are morally obligated to be good Samaritans 3 Therefore we are not morally obligated to go through with a pregnancy that is the result of your voluntary and knowing actions Maryann warren up to pg 52 102611 Euthanasia Argument for compassion 1 In some cases a person39s dying is better for them than continuing to live 2 If 1 then AE is sometimes morally right active euthanasia 3 Therefore 3 AE is sometimes morally right Says this is awed argument because Williams argument for nature 1 Every human tends to act or react automatically in a protective or evasive way toward deadly threats 2 If 1 then survival is a natural goal of every human 3 If survival is the natural goal of every human then AE is always morally wrong 4 Therefore 4 AE is always morally wrong Personal goal personal dignity vs natural goal natural dignity Reject Not powerful argument 11711 Rachel s Argument from similar Justification 1 PE is sometimes morally ok because in some cases PE minimizes suffering 2 If 1 then AE is sometimes morally ok because in some cases AE minimizes suffering Therefore 3 AE is sometimes morally OK because is some cases AE minimizes suffering An act quotminimizesquot suffering if and only if no alternative to it leads to less suffering Best way to object is to suggest is suffering the only morally relevant thing There are other tings to consider May be morally wrong in spite of the minimizing suffering Intrinsic value vs extrinsic value Intrinsic ofx x has value all by itself independently of how x is related to other things ie happiness has intrinsic value The feeling of happiness has a positive value to it but it does not relate to the value of happiness Its good all by itselfwithout being compared to things extrinsic ofx x has value because of how x is related to other things ie money is useless all on its own It valuably simply by how it related to other things The quotoverallquot value ofx the intrinsic value of x the extrinsic vale of X The intrinsic value of killing is no worse than the intrinsic value of letting die smithjones argument 1 Smith case is no worse overall than Jones case 2 if 1 then smith s killing is no worse intrinsically than Jones letting die 3 IF smith s killing is no worse intrinsically than jones letting die then 4 4 therefore the intrinsic value of killing is no worse than the intrinsic value of letting die both equally horrible no clear resolution 11911 Uncontroversial principle about preferential treatment ts morally ok to give preferential treatment to A amp deny it to B only if A has some morally relevant characteristic to a higher degree than B Singer criterion SC An animal experiment is morally ok only if it s morally ok to perform the same kind of experiment on a brain damaged orphaned human infant Argument for the SC 1 Brain damaged orphaned human infants have no morally relevant characteristics to a higher degree than nonhuman animals 2 If 1 then it it s not morally ok to give preferential treatment to the infants and deny it to the animals 3 If it s not morally ok to give preferential treatment to the infants and deny it to the animals then SC is true Therefore 4 SC is true Morally relevant characteristics Having parents who care about you Sensitivity to pain Selfdirectedness Awareness Potential for cognitive development 111611 Brain damaged or orphaned infants have no morally relevant characteristics to a higher degree than adult non human animals Speciesism a bias in favor of a certain species against other species singer says anyone who rejects this is engaging in speciesism compares it to racism saying that it is wrong doesn t adequately explain issue Singer s argument is weak Cohen self proclaimed speciesist A right a claim or potential claim that one party may exercise against the other Cohen s argument against animal rights 1 Animals can t comprehend moral rules and principles 2 If 1 then animals can t make or respond to moral claims 3 fanimals can make or respond to moral claims then 4 therefore 4 Animals have no moral rights An individual X has moral rights only If X can make and respond to moral claims An individual X has moral rights only is X belongs to a species that has members who can make and respond to moral claims 11212011 Cohen s defense of speciesism 1 If all species are morally equal then either A neither humans nor rodents have moral rights or B rodents have all the same moral rights as humans Neither A nor B is true therefore 3 Not all species are morally equal Iquot Argument X quotbegs the question If one can t tell whether or not all of x s premises are true without knowing whether x s conclusion is true assuming the conclusion is true already Any argument that begs the question is a bad one 11282011 Annas paper seems to reject moral realism What should determine who gets a transplant judgments about social worth quotl quotl All judgments about social worth are arbitrary If 1 then social worth should not determine who gets a transplant therefore 3 Social worth should not determine who gets transplant arbitrary not based on objective fact Transplants should go to the highest bidder only if wealth is fairly distributed Wealth is not fairly distributed therefore 3 Transplants shouldn t go to the highest bidder quotfairlyquot according to how hard a worker Argument from the pricelessness of life quotl Iquot If transplants should go to the highest bidder then life isn t priceless Life is priceless therefore 3 Transplants shouldn t go to the highest bidder If a candidate should allocate transplants then either A or B is acceptable A there is a pattern to how the committee allocates B there is no pattern Neither A nor B therefore 3 A committee shouldn t allocate transplants Lottery 1 Iquot Using the lottery method will involve ignoring medical criteria like the following a post transplant probability of survival b post transplant longevity al objective c immediacy of death without transplant d expense of post transplant rehabilitation If 1 then 3 therefore 3 We shouldn t use the lottery method 113011 Papers covered on final Starts with warren article Abortions Williams et al euthanasia 2 articles on animal experimentation Transplant paper 1 a Xi an lh H39e l mi l iii n m i an objection against warren s responsibility argument they don t fit very will with the typical pregnancy conceptus vs robber Active euthanasia is wrong Natural goal vs personal goal Natural dignity Distinction between natural and personal dignity Point of other arguments different from others document number 9 Trying to show euthanasia against self interest not necessarily morally wrong All have a flaw if then statement If Some cases then overall consequences Thinks active euthanasia is sometimes morally right not always morally wrong Intrinsic value vs extrinsic value Intrinsic value of killing no worse than letting someone die response to objection to their argument didn t prove smith case over all is worse than jones case crucial weakness in argument to assume that this is right nl i 5 i ii brain damaged orphaned human infants vs animal thinks these are not significantly morally different from one another morally relevant characteristics Didn t mention being human as morally relevant characteristic vulnerability in argument response to this objection speciesism Compares it to racism Problem with comparison saying speciesism is unjustified Doesn t mean morally wrong A right is a claim or potential claim on party may exercise against another his definition of rights Objection to his argument animals seem to understand moral rules from its behavior Wolves in a wolf pack House trained dog counterobjection instinctive Animals have no cognitive capacity of rules All conditioned responses and instinct no reasoning another objection brain damaged human being Comatose humans counter objection not individual capacity that matters It s the species that you belong to that have members that can respond to moral claims Flaw never defends his conception of rights 113 v i h he disagrees with this idea assumes medical criteria are free ofvalue judgments flaw
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'