Bioethics Part 1 - Moral Arguments

bioethics

an applied form of ethics focused on health care, medical science, and medical technology

medical ethics

focuses primarily on the ethical situations that arise during the patient-medical provider interaction sub-field of bioethics

ethics

the study of morality using the tools and methods of philosophy

philosophy

discipline that systematically examines questions about the human state using critical reasoning, logical argument, and careful reflection

morality

principles concerning how someone defines right or wrong; whether societal rules, standards, or theories are good or bad

descriptive ethics

studies empirical or measurable facts about morality; ethics asks how we ought to live, this asks how we actually live

normative ethics

the search for justification of moral standards and norms

moral standards

moral principles, moral rules, moral virtues, and moral theories

metaethics

study of the meaning and justification of basic moral beliefs; deeper than normative ethics

applied ethics

the use of moral norms and concepts to resolve practical moral issues; moral principles, theories, arguments, and analyses are applied to a particular situation

aesthetic norms

this looks/smells/tastes/sounds “good” or “bad”

social norms

polite behavior; can vary between settings

grammatic norms

the established rules for a language governing how words are put together to form sentences

prudential norms

what is in my own best interest

legal norms

what is lawful

normative dominance, universality, impartiality, and reasonableness

traits of moral norms (4)

normative dominance

moral norms should dominate other kinds of norms; just because the law agrees does not mean they are morally correct

universality

moral principles or judgements should apply in all similar circumstances; reflective of logical and fair assumptions that every should make

impartiality

everyone is equal and everyone’s interests count the same; no one is inherently better than another person for nay reason

morally relevant

determines if an action is considered morally permissable or obligatory; do you have a true reason to treat this person differently?

reasonableness

decisions should be backed after careful, critical thoughtfulness; our own personal outlook/theories should not impact the process of considering a moral situation; take effort to practice this

moral obligations

what we do; how we ought to behave; primarily talks about actions

moral values

about how we judge what is morally good or bad; how we decide to give praise or blame

obligatory

you must do this action to be right. not doing so would be wrong

permissable

doing the action is good; not doing it is not wrong either

supererogatory act

any moral action taken above and beyond our obligation is praiseworthy

absolute moral principles

applies without exception

prima facie moral principles

applies in all cases unless an exception is warranted; only justified when conflicts arise between two moral principles

autonomy, nonmalefience, beneficence, utility, and justice

major moral principles of bioethics (5)

autonomy

a rational person’s capacity for self-governace of self-determination; the ability to direct one’s own life and choose for oneself

autonomous individuals

have intrinsic worth because they have the power to make their own rationla and moral decisions

diminished capacity

primary reason for exceptions to bodily automnomy; are they rational?

harm principle

can limit autonomy to prevent harm to another individual; psychiatric holds

paternalism

limits someone’s automnomy for their own good

weak paternalism

thought to be morally acceptable by most individuals; psychiatric holds

strong paternalism

generally considered morally objectable; not telling a terminally ill patient they will die if they demand the truth

nonmalefience

defined as the moral imperative to “do no harm” either intentionally or unintentionally; providers should exhibit due care

beneficence

principle of morally right action that is more than just “do no harm”, it requires acitvely trying to prevent or remove harm

utility

generate the greatest good to harm ratio possible; we should do what maximizes benefit for the most individuals

justice

people getting what they deserve

retributive justice

punishment for wrongdoing; both for bad actions and as deterrent for others to prevent future wrongdoing

distributive justice

fair allotment of society’s advantages and disadvantages; who gets healthcare, what and how much should they get, and who should pay for it

libertarian

emphasize personal freedoms in a free-market system; government should only intervein to protect society and protect the free-market; should not reallocate from one group to another

egalitarian

a just distribution is equal distribution; requires a limitation on individuals’ personal liberties; requires a strong governement involvement

moral objectivism

moral norms/principles exist and are true/valid for everyone; can be prima facie

moral absolutism

moral norms must be the same in every situation with no explanations; must be absolute

ethical relativism

moral standards are relative to what individuals or cultures believe

individual relativism

that is one person’s truth but it is not your truth

cultural relativism

people’s moral judgements do differ from culture to culture

infalliable

incapable of making mistakes or being wrong

divine command theory

a view proposing that an action's moral status is equivalent to whether it is commanded by God or a divine being

moral reasoning

critical reasoning in ethics

premises

supporting statements resulting in a conclusion; they are either true or false; may not change your opinion but can prove something

deductive arguments

set up such that if premises are true then the conclusion absolutely must be true; cannot be wrong if premises are considered true

valid argument

if it has true premises cannot have a false conclusion

inductive arguments

give proable support for their conclusions; not designed to give decisive support to a conclusion; designed to establish that, if premises are true, the conclusions are more likely than not to be true

strong inductive argument

when premises are true, the conclusion is very probably true

weak inductive argument

when premises are true, the conclusion only may be true

sound

deductive argument that is valid with true premises

unsound

deductive argument that is valid with false premises

cogent

inductive argument that is strong with true premises

inconclusive

inductive argument that is weak with true/false premises

antecedent

p

consequent

q

moral theories

general explanations of what makes an action right or wrong

considered moral judgements

judgements deemed credile after careful consideration; as unbiased as possible

counter examples

often used to question the validity of a moral premise