November 6, 2018 Theory

 formal account of a phenomena

Suggested Research and Writing Process
Utilitarianism
 Will not be after the content of the research  argues that the rightness or wrongness of an
paper, more after the procedure on how to action is determined by the presence or
research and write paper absence of utility in it
 definition of Utility
Process o property in any object, whereby it tends
1. Topic to produce benefit, advantage,
a. with a discussion on pleasure, good, or happiness (Jeremy
i. the issue/problem the paper Bentham)
wants to address
ii. objectives of the paper History of Utilitarianism
2. Outline  Forebears of Utilitarianism
a. 20 questions o Aristippus of Cyrene (400 BC)
i. Topic  “pleasure is the supreme good”
ii. Issue/Problem o Epicurus (341 BC)
iii. Objectives  Founder of Epicureanism
iv. Related works on the  “Morality is based on what is
topic/problem pleasurable” (tranquility rather
v. Paper’s position on the problem than bodily pleasure)
and the arguments supporting o Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)
it o J.S. Mill (1806-1873)
b. Answers to 20 questions o Henry Sidgwick (1838 =1900)
3. Draft  applied utilitarianism to
a. consolidation of the 20 answers to an Economics
essay
4. Final Paper Act and Rule of Utilitarianism
 Act Utilitarianism
November 8, 2018 o assess the rightness or wrongness of
each individual action directly by its
The Problem of Limits of Law in Bioethical Issues consequences
 Rule Utilitarianism
(EXAM: 3 contributions ng law sa Bioethics daw) o does not consider the consequences of
each particular action but considers the
Introduction consequences of adopting some general
A. Scientific and technical progress has led to rule
unimaginable changes o ex: keeping promises
a. o 2 kinds
The Thick Social Matrix for Bioethics (Anthropological  Possible Rule
Approaches)  Rule actually operating in
society
Sa isang research, sa isang event, hindi lang puro o two tests
medical/ethical  what general rule do I follow in
this particular action?
Methods and Theories in Bioethics  will this rule, if followed,
maximize happiness?
Method
 approach Utilitarian Formulations
 way of doing things  “acts are right or wrong solely in virtue of the
 a procedure goodness or badness of their actual
 panglapit/means to go to a certain point consequences”
  “greatest good for the greatest number”
 “always maximize net desire satisfaction”
((STUDY THIS. lalabas sa exam))
Examples of Utilitarianism-Applied
1) Disability-Adjusted Life Year (DALY)
 YLL (years of live lost) + YLD (years lived
with disability)
 relies on an acceptance that the most
appropriate measure of the effects of
chronic illness is time, both time lost
due to premature death and time spent
disabled by disease
2) Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY)
 a measure of disease burden, including
both the quality and the quantity of life
lived
 assessing the value for money of a
medical intervention
 based on the number of years of life
that would be added by the
intervention
 each year in perfect health is assigned
the value of 1 down to a value of 0 for
being dead
Kantian Ethics
 Immanuel Kant
Source
 Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals
(1785)
 aims to “seek out and establish the supreme
principle of morality”
Thesis
 The moral worth of an action lies
“not in the purpose to be attained by it, but in
the maxim in accordance with which it is
decided upon” (Groundwork of the Metaphysics
of Morals)
Maxim
 a moral action that is commanded for its own
sake;
 if I choose, I make sure that the maxim of
subjective principle of my action accords the
requirements of my morality
 The good will’s
Duty to Goodwill
 Good will is the only thing that is morally good
without condition/qualification
 Good will is good
 Goodwill vs talents
 Goodwill vs happiness (which can lead to bad
consequences)
A good will is always motivated by duty
 someone who hates life but resists the
temptation commit suicide just because it
would be wrong
 someone who loses sympathy for others but is
motivated by the duty to alleviate others
Maxims as Imperatives
 imperatives = commands expressed by ought or
must
 apply only to those who can, but do not
necessarily, act in accordance…
Goodwill is a categorical maxim
 when they apply to all rational beings as such,
whatever their desires or interest
Three significant formulations of the categorical
imperative
1. “universal law” formulation
a. act only according to that maxim by
which you can also will that it would
become a universal law
2. “law of nature” formulation
a. act as if you’re creating a natural law
b. a more concrete formulation of
Universal Law
3. “human as an end” formulation
a. it’s about relating with others
b. act in such a way that you always treat
humanity, whether in your own person
or in the person of any other, never
simply as a means, but always at the
same time as an end
4. autonomy formulation
a. think of each rational will as legislating
for itself and all others
Universalizability Criterion
 if we ask what motivates the goodwill after all
particular ends are subtracted, we get respect
for law as such: an insistence that the maxim of
action is suitable to serve as a universal law
Philo 174 Final Exam
December 6, 2019 (Thursday)
4-6PM
Principlism
Thesis
 most moral decision-makers descriptively and
prescriptively have used these for moral
principles
o respect for autonomy (person)
o non-maleficence
o beneficence
o justice
Principles (Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Tom L.
Beauchamp & James F. Childress)
 judgments that are generally accepted or a
common morality
 basic statements about desirable values
Only 4 principles can be invoked
 Respect for Autonomy /Person
o promotes autonomous choices or the
intentional choices of agents who
understand what they are undertaking
and who are free from undue influences
on their decisions
o ex: requirement for the informed
consent of patients before health
professionals intervene in their bodies
 non-maleficence
o requires medical professionals not to
intentionally harm their patients
 beneficence
o requires health professional to act for
the benefit of their patients where
benefit is construed with the same
latitude that was used to interpret harm
in the principle of non-maleficence
 justice
o includes distributive and rectificatory
forms of justice
o benefits and burdens be shared equally
o ex: the state shall provide a certain level
of healthcare to all of its citizens
o an ethical scheme for rationing scarce
resources (such as organs for transplant
or beds in an intensive care unit)
November 22, 2018
Virtue Ethics
 argues that “an action is right if and only if it is
what an agent with a virtuous character would
do in the circumstance”
 holds that an action cannot be properly judged
as right or wrong without reference to
considerations of virtue or character
o character = set of virtues
 examples:
o going out of one’s way to help a needy
stranger
o giving a gift to a friend
Revival of the Virtue Ethics
 can be traced back to Elizabeth Anscombe’s
article “Modern Moral Philosophy”, published in
1958
 did not begin to appear until the early 1980s
mainly in the writing of Philippa Foot, Bernard
Williams and etc
Virtue and Character
 virtue
o (greek arête) – excellence
o even inanimate objects could have
arête since they were assumed to have
a telos, that is, a purpose
o a kind of second nature that disposes us
not only to do the right thing rightly but
also to gain pleasure from what we do
(Artistotle, Metaphysics)
 character
o (greek hexis) – the habitual dispositions
constitutive of the virtues
o not simply the sum of the individual
virtues; rather, it names the pattern of
thought and action
Virtues vs Arts (their excellences lie in results)
Examples of How Virtue Ethics is Applied in Bioethics
 abortion
o why would a women go for an
abortion?
o the traditional debate about the
competing rights of the mother and the
fetus is fundamentally irrelevant to the
morality of abortion
o individuals can exercise their rights
virtuously or viciously
 preimplantation genetic decisions (PGD)
  euthanasia
o wanting to die does not necessarily
make death good for that person;
rather, death can be good to a person
only when his life lacks a minimum of
basic human goods, such as autonomy,
friendship, and moral support
Casuistry
 analyzes and resolves instance of moral issues
by interpreting general moral rules in light of
particular circumstances
 “for casuistry, moral truth resides in the details..
the meaning and scope of moral principles is
determined contextually through the
interpretation of factual situations in relation to
paradigm cases” (John Arras, p. 37)
 from the Latin word “casus” meaning event,
occasion, occurrence
 in later Latin “case”, refer to the practice
described by contemporary Christian
theologians as “cases of conscience” (casus
conscientiae)
Methodology
 two characteristics of rhetorical technique
important for casuistry
o topics
o comparison of paradigm and analogy
Origins of Casuistry
 tension between general moral norms and
particular decisions
 Sophists vs Plato
o Sophists maintained that since no
universal truths could be affirmed in
moral matters, right and wrong
depended entirely on the
circumstances: ethics consisted in the
rhetorical ability to persuade persons
about “opportune” action
 Aristotle
o proposed that in ethical deliberations,
which deal with contingent matters,
formal demonstration was not possible.
rather, plausible argument would
support probable conclusions
 Marcus Tullius Cicero
o held that to be a virtuous person one
must become “a good calculator of
one’s duty in the circumstances, so that
by adding and subtracting
considerations, we may see where our
duty lies” (On Duties, I, 59)
 3 major religions
o Judaism, Christianity, Islam
o they have scripture in which the word
of God is recorded; that is, in which God
speaks to beliers in concrete and
specific language
o also, the divine message contains
imperatives that enjoin oral obligations,
sometimes stated in broad terms and
sometimes referring to specific forms of
behavior
Case method in ethics = case method in law
morisprudence = jurisprudence
November 29, 2018
Discourse Ethics by Apel, Habermas
 ObamaCare
 Under the act, hospitals and primary physicians
would transform their practices financially,
technologically, and clinically to drive better
health outcomes, lower costs, and improve
their methods of distribution and accessibility
Major Proponent
1. Karl-Otto Apel
2. Jurgen Habermas
Thesis
A. Karl Otto-Apel’s Formulation
a. all human needs , as potential claims
that can be communicated
interpersonally, are ethically relevant
and must be acknowledged insofar as
they can be justified interpersonally
through statements
B. Jurgen Habermas’ Formulation
a. program of philosophical justification in
moral theory that has the tasks of
identifying and justifying whatever
morally significant content can be
derived specifically from or arrived at
via the essential non-disclaimable
Discourse defined
 for Apel and Habermas alike, the term
discourse means roughly that argumentation is
conducted under conditions of free and open
dialogue
Rational Discourse as a Rational Moral Discourse
 occurs when participants adopt as the decisive
validity-determining question whether “the
foreseeable consequences and side effects of
[a norm’s] general observance for the interest
and value-orientations of each individual could
be freely accept jointly by all concerned.”
(Habermas)

Moral Judgments
 moral judgments are judgments on the moral
rightness, wrongness, or praiseworthiness of
claims concerning what morally may ought, or
ought not to be done. That something may
morally or may not morally be done is usually
expressed in the format of a moral norm

Moral Agency an
 presents a certain mode of action

Moral Pluralism

Five Parameters of Moral Disclosure

Parameter 1: Reasonable Articulation of Need-Claims

 all participants in a discourse should be capable
of articulating any need claim they take to be
morally significant
Parameter 3: Non-strategic Transparency
 all participants should be able to covey their
articulations of morally significant need-claims
 truthfully and without strategic reservations

Parameter 5: Comprehensive Inclusion

 participants should constrain what their
community of discourse can accept as good
reasons by the following requirement: that
participants must anticipate whether their
reasons can be rehearsed by all non-participant
others who figure specifically in the content of
any moral judgment that results consensually
from the participants’ discourse