Bioethics Intro

Philosophy + Ethics

Metaphysics

  • beyond physics

  • ultimate reality, not accessible through ordinary empirical experience

  • topics

    • free will

    • causality

    • nature of matter

    • immortality

    • existence of God

epistemology

  • theory of knowledge

  • nature of knowledge + justification of belief

political philosophy

  • how to best arrange collective life

  • political institutions and social practices

    • economic system

    • pattern of family life

aesthetics

  • study of philosophy of beauty and taste

  • philosophy of art

ethics

  • systematic endeavour to understand moral concepts and justify moral principles and theories

  • analyze concepts as right, wrong, permissible, ought, good, and evil in their contexts

what is philosophy?

  • an activity

  • way of thinking about certain sorts of questions

  • most distinctive feature = logical argument

Arguments

Structure

  • argument = reasons → conclusion

Aim

  • persuasion

  • conclusion = whats the main thing this person wants me to believe?

  • issue = what question is this an answer to?

standard form

  • premises first

  • conclusion last

  • why?

    • helpful to have one standard form of argument when we try to analyze arguments

implicit premises

  • unstated premises that need to be added to form coherent argument

sub-conclusions

  • premises can be conclusions of smaller arguments within the larger argument

Deductive arguments

  • premises are intended to provide a guarantee of the truth of the conclusion

  • judging soundness of an argument?

    • evaluate two things

      1. truth of the premises

      2. validity of the argument

  • argument valid?

    • if all premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true

    • valid = if it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false

    • invalid = if it is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false

common valid argument forms

Modus ponens - affirming the antecedent

  1. if p then q

  2. p

  3. therefore, q

example

  1. if all events are caused, then human beings are not free beings

  2. all events are caused

  3. therefore, human beings are not free beings

Modus tollens - denying the consequent

  1. if p, then q

  2. not q

  3. therefore, not p

example

  1. if the future is alr determined, then I am not responsible for my actions

  2. I am responsible for my action

  3. therefore, future is not already determined

Disjunctive syllogism

  1. either p or q

  2. not p

  3. therefore, q

example

  1. either Darwin’s theory of evolution is wrong, or we humans are related to monkeys

  2. Humans are not related to monleys

  3. Therefore, Darwin’s theory of evolution is wrong

hypothetical syllogism

  1. if p, then q

  2. if q, then r

  3. therefore p, then r

example

  1. if materialism is false, then marxism is a faulty philosophical system

  2. if Marxism is a faulty philosophical system, then one should not believe everything Marx writes

  3. Therefore, if materialism is false, then one should not believe everything Marx writes.

Value claims

  • claim about the worth of something

    • rate something highly = positive value judgements

    • rate something lowly = negative value judgements

  • parts of value judgements

    • value object = being evaluated/judged

    • value term = indicates worth of value object

examples

value judgement/claim = you should not kill animals

value object = killing animals

value term = should not

Empirical claims

claim whose truth/falsity can be determined only by looking to experience

example

earth is flat

Conceptual claims

claim whose truth/falsity can be determined by analysing the meanings of the words used

example

triangles have three sides

moral arguments

argument in support of a moral claim

normative theories

  • provide general principles that tell us what makes actions or policies right and wrong

example

any act that minimizes overall suffering is morally right

inductive arguments

premises are intended to provide support for the probable truth of the conclusion

example 1

  1. most Greeks like fish

  2. Socrates is Greek

  3. Therefore, Socrates likes fish

example 2 - strong

  1. Dr. Badesh will see 100 flu sufferers this year

  2. Dr. Badesh has treated 99 flu sufferers this year with antiobiotics

  3. therefore, Dr. Badesh will treat all of the flu sufferers he sees this year with antibiotics

example 3 - weak

  1. Dr. Badesh will see 100 flu sufferers this year

  2. Dr. Badesh has treated 1 flu sufferer this year with antiobiotics

  3. Therefore, Dr. Badesh will treat all of the flu sufferers he sees this year with antibiotics