Bioethics Test #1 Review Flashcards

Moral Norms

Standards that dictate how people ought to behave when their actions affect the rights, welfare, dignity, or interests of others, carrying greater authority than customs or laws.

Autonomy

A person's rational capacity for self-governance or self-determination, giving them the right to control decisions regarding their care.

Beneficence

The duty and practice of doing goodness, kindness, and charity to promote well-being.

Nonmaleficence

The non-infliction of evil, harm, or injury to others and to one's self.

Justice

The act of giving one what they deserve or what is due to them.

Normative

An expression of evaluation of something, characterized by words like should, shouldn't, right, and wrong.

Descriptive

Describing something by expressing an understanding of how it is or could be without offering an implicit evaluation.

Normative Dominance

The concept that moral norms usually carry greater importance or authority than non-moral norms.

Utilitarianism

An ethical theory prioritizing the greater number of people over a minority, holding that right actions result in the most beneficial balance of good over bad.

Act-Utilitarianism

The view that the rightness of actions depends solely on the relative good produced by individual actions.

Rule-Utilitarianism

An approach that avoids judging rightness by specific acts and focuses instead on rules governing categories of acts.

Principle of Impartiality

The concept that the welfare and interest of each individual should be given equal weight, unless there is a morally relevant difference.

Singer's Proposal

The argument that physical distance does not replace or erase an individual's moral responsibility to help others in need.

Kantianism

An ethical framework asserting that morality depends on the intent behind an act rather than its consequences, and that rational agents possess inherent worth.

Virtue Ethics

An ethical theory centered on moral virtues such as justice and bravery.

Care Ethics

A feminist ethical perspective focused on community building and interpersonal relationships.

Paternalism

The overriding of a person's actions or decision-making for their own good, even when they are capable of self-determination.

Weak Paternalism

Directing or making decisions for individuals who are not capable of making choices for themselves.

Strong Paternalism

Overriding a person's actions or choices even if they are capable of making their own decisions.

Gawande's Middle Man Position

A clinical approach where a practitioner listens to patients while maintaining an obligation to guide them toward beneficial medical choices.

Persuasion

Guiding patient action ethically by offering evidence, explaining competence, and making recommendations.

Coercion

Influencing behavior through threat, deception, force, or manipulation.

Medical Futility

A situation in which a medical treatment will not improve a patient's condition or provide meaningful benefit.

Mill's Harm Principle

John Stuart Mill's principle stating that a person's autonomy may be restricted in specific situations to prevent harm to others.

back then beneficence would do what?

take priority over autonomy and nonmaleficence

What distinguishes moral norms from other kinds of standards?

moral norms relates to what is right vs what is wrong while other kinds of standards relate more to personal and social preferences, ettiquette, practical rules, etc

• moral norms tend to dominate and be more important since they are one of the core elements of ethics

ex. non-moral: not talking when your mouth is full, arriving to class on time

      moral: lying to deliberately hurt someone is wrong, stealing is wrong

What are the core ethical principles typically appealed to in Bioethics

Autonomy - the right of everyone person to have control over their lives and decisions regarding their care 

Benficence - the duty and practice of doing goodness, kindness, and charity to promote well-being

Nonmaleficence - the non-infliction of evil, harm, or injury to others and of course to one’s self

Justice - the act of giving one what they deserve or what is due to them

What is Utilitarianism?

The act of prioritizing a greater # of people over a minority

• says actions are morally permissible if and only if they produce at least as much net happiness as any other available action

What is the difference between ‘Act’ vs. ‘Rule’ Utilitarianism?

Act utilitarianism - the idea that the rightness of actions depends sadly on the relative good produced by individual action

Rule utilitarianism - avoids judging rightness by specific acts and focuses on rules governing categories of acts (rules) 

examples of this: breaking a promise

Act utilitarianism would allow a promise to be broken if the positive consequences for all those affected outweigh the negative

Rule utilitarianism would not allow a promise to be broken because of how they believe it would result in more pain than pleasure in society as a whole

• Nobody could rely on each other anymore

• No trust 

• What are some of the common criticisms of Utilitarianism?

• how it excuses actions depending on the situation

• how it is hard to define and measure utility (good or well-being)

• how it is extremely demanding as it requires us to bring about the best outcome and leaves little room for personal things or partiality towards certain people/loved ones

What is Mill’s ‘harm principle’ and how does it work?

Made by John Stuart Mill, his principle relates to autonomy and suggests that in certain situations we can restrict someone’s autonomy to protect others

Ex. if a patient experiencing a severe mental health crisis threatens violence towards themselves or others, doctors can admit them into a hospital against their will to prevent harm to themselves or other

What is Kant’s ethics?

Kant’s ethics talks about how morality is more about intent behind an act as opposed to the consequence or outcome of an act 

• He says ppl have worth because they are rational agents and they can make decisions for themselves (excluding children or people with intellectual disabilities)

• Also focuses on not treating someone as mere mean (treating someone with respect and not using them as a tool to get what you want)

• Moral duties like telling the truth are absolute and do not allow for exceptions

How might you try to criticize, or defend Kant’s ethics?

I might try to criticize Kant’s ethics by saying that this way of doing would strip the human element of empathy and genuine kindness and that how Kant bases human worth only on rational thinking is wrong, humans are worth more and still have worth regardless of they have rational thinking or not. 

I might try to defend his ethics by saying that this helps prevent people from being used as it creates a boundary against it

What is Singer’s proposal and how does he argue for it?

Singer’s proposal is that distance doesn’t replace or erase moral responsibility. He argues for this by including an example of a child drowning in front of you. Most people would jump in and help even if you ruin your shoes because you now have a duty to save a life regardless of the price you would have to pay for it (your shoes ruined). He then argues that physical distance makes no moral difference and that we still have the duty to help out. An example of this is helping starving children across the world.

What is ‘autonomy’ and what is ‘paternalism’?

Autonomy: a person’s rational capacity for self-governance or self-determination

Paternalism: the overriding of a person’s actions or decision-making for his or her own good

do you think that autonomy is an absolute principle in Bioethics?

I do think autonomy is an absolute principle in bioethics because bioethics are ethics focused on healthcare and in healthcare patient autonomy is so important

Should ppl be allowed to select embryo’s sex or other genetic characteristics?

I think people shouldn’t be allowed to select embryo’s sex or other genetic characteristics because it creates a hypocritical form of autonomy. While it respects the actual patient’s choice it ignores and overrides the future autonomy of the child since their genetic identity is decided for them without their consent.

Is Gawande’s general approach the right one?

I believe Gawande’s general approach is the right one because its a good balance of informative care and living the best and healthiest version of yourself while also allowing the patients to make their own decision

What kind of paternalism, if any, is Gawande arguing for?

Gawande does not argue for any kind of paternalism because he wants patients to be allowed to make the main decisions and not be too swayed or influenced by doctors as doctors should just  act as advisors and leave the patient to figure out their decison alone

Ethical theories aim to:  

(1) provide moral guidance

(2) moral evaluation of human conduct

Ethics is largely practical, as it aims to do what?

• provide decision procedures for moral questions

Metaethics

study the meaning and logical structure of moral beliefs

purpose of metaethics

to question assumptions that inform normative ethics

Applied Ethics

application of moral norms to specific moral issues or cases

• a norm in ethics is an IDEA/OUGHT/OUGHT NOT/SHOULD

diff between normative and descriptive

Normative vs. Descriptive

(values)            (facts) 

Morals               science

Emotions           concrete

 Values              actually

The Preeminence of Reason:

ethics involves/ requires ethical reasoning

The Universal Perspective:

ethic requires that moral judgements follow the principle of universalizability - the idea that a moral statement applying in one situation must apply in all other situations that are relevantly similar

The Principle of Impartiality:

the welfare and interest of each individual should be given the same weight as all others (unless there is a morally relevant difference) 

• need to treat everyone equally unless there is moral reason not to

The Dominance of Moral Norms:

when moral norms conflict with non-moral norms, moral considerations win (they tend to be more important) 

doing ethics is an important part of

personal intellectual growth and it may be vital for broader moral progress

Arguments (vs. assertions)

argument is reasoning put into words, offered as evidence or reason to believe that a further statement, called the “conclusion,” is true, that is, corresponds to reality

assertion is a standalone statement without supporting evidence

difference between arguments and non-arguements

• Arguments offer reasons (evidence in support of a conclusion, while non-argument do not

• Non-arguments are often simple descriptions, or express mere opinions or inclinations, or appeal to emotions and feelings

deductive argument

an argument that is supposed to give logically conclusive support to its conclusion

aim is to show that the conclusion must be true

claims that if the premises are all true, then the conclusion must be true

a good deductive argument is valid if…

the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises

a good deductive argument is sound if….

the premises are true

goal of a good deductive arguement

to conclusively establish the conclusion

example of deductive arguement

1. Jupiter is a planet in our solar system

      2. Every planet in our solar system is smaller than the Sun

      3. Therefore, it follows necessarily that Jupiter is smaller than the sun

inductive argument

supposed to offer probable support to its conclusion

aim of inductive argument

to show that the conclusion is probably, though not certainly, true

main claim of inductive argument

if the premises are all true, then the conclusion is likely or probably true (though not certain)

goal of inductive argument

to establish the conclusion w/ a high degree of probability, though w/ something less than complete certainty

example of inductive argument

1. We left the fish out on the table last night after dinner

      2. Nobody in the house ate any overnight

      3. Orange, the cat, loves fish

      4. It is likely that Orange ate the leftover fish

ethymeme

an argument missing a premise or conclusion

Bad arguments come in many shapes and sizes, but they all have one or

both of these problems:

• At least one false premise

• A conclusion that doesn’t follow from its premise

fallacies

mistake in reasoning that makes an argument invalid or misleading (ex.equivocation, false equivalence, etc)

consequentialism

the only thing relevant to determining whether or not an action is morally right are its consequences