Bioethics and Values Clark Wolf Iowa State University

1
Bioethics and ValuesClark WolfIowa State
University
2

• BIOETHICS AS A BRANCH OF PHILOSOPHY
• The problems of philosophy involve questions in
  which we are all (or should all be) deeply
  interested at the most basic level. They are
  important to us as we make decisions about what
  to believe, and how to be critical of our own
  naively held beliefs. Philosophical investigation
  may help us to determine what kinds of choices we
  should make, and what kind of person to be. It
  may help us to understand and justify our belief
  (or disbelief) in God. It may help us to form a
  rational life plan, and to better understand our
  own motives and fears. Philosophical questions
  are important to us as we try to understand what
  we are and to determine our place in the scheme
  of things. And they are important to us as we try
  to choose right actions in a complicated and
  difficult world, and to find meaning in our
  lives. These are not trivial projects.

3
Identifying Ethics Principles of ethics should
provide us guidance as we make choices in a
complicated world. Ideally, an account of
ethics should help us to identify moral
principles and morally relevant features of the
choices we face.
4

• There is no simple recipe for ethical decision
  making. Philosophical and religious theories
  about ethics do not remove our need (obligation?)
  to exercise deliberative judgment and to evaluate
  alternative values that are at play in concrete
  cases.

5

• Ethical codes of conduct instruct us on what we
  ought or ought not to do.
• Typical ethical theories or ethical codes include
  basic principles that are intended to be used to
  guide conduct.

6

• Ethics and Reasons Our ethical values are
  supported by reasons and principles. For any
  moral or ethical claim, we can evaluate it by
  considering the reasons that support it.
• Upshot We can be self-reflective and critical
  about our moral values. The goal of
  philosophical ethics is to help us to be
  self-reflective in this way.

7
Ethical Theories

• Principles, concepts, and ideals that can be used
  to justify moral judgments and choices, or to
  rank outcomes as good, better, worse, or bad.
• An ethical theory should be capable of serving as
  a guide for conduct and judgment.

8
Case for Consideration The Trolley

• Youre riding a run-away trolley car, and the
  only control you have is to direct the car on to
  one track or another. On one track ahead there
  are five people, on the other there is only one.
  If you do nothing, the trolley will kill five,
  but if you intervene it will kill only one.
  Should you kill one person to save five? What
  should you do?

9
What justifies your judgment about what should be
done?

• Save as many as you can.
• Day After Tomorrow Scientist
• The good of the many outweighs the good of the
  few. -Spock
• Act so that you provide the maximum benefit to
  the maximum number of people.
• Are there other principles that could be used to
  justify the judgment that one should direct the
  trolley to kill as few as possible?

10
Utilitarianism

• Act always such that your action produces the
  greatest benefit for the greatest number of
  people.
• J.S. Mill,
• Jeremy Bentham

11
Is Utilitarianism an Acceptable Ethical Theory?

• Focuses our attention on well-being.
• Leaves room for moral concern for animals as well
  as for people.
• The question is not can they reason nor can
  they speak, but can they suffer. -Jeremy
  Bentham
• Includes an implicit appeal to equality
  Everyones interests count the same.

12
Testing an Ethical Theory Apply the theory to a
different problem.

• Case The Surgeons Dilemma
• You are a surgeon with six patients. Five of
  them need major organ transplants, which you
  could easily do if you had access to transplant
  organs. The sixth, an ideal donor for all the
  relevant organs, has a cold. Should you kill one
  person to save six?
• Question What does utilitarianism imply in this
  case? Should this cause us to call the theory
  into question? Do we need to appeal to
  non-utilitarian values to explain what is wrong
  with killing one patient to save six?

13
Revising Utilitarianism?

• Rights The reason it is wrong to kill one to
  save six is that it would violate the rights of
  the person killed.
• This response requires that we give an account
  of rights, explain what they are, why they have
  moral significance, and how they may interact
  with utilitarian considerations.

14
Universal Rules

• Perhaps we cant universalize a principle to
  kill one to save six
• Act only such that you could will the maxim on
  which you act as a universal law. -Immanuel
  Kant
• Interpretation
• Ask What if everyone did that?
• Kant says that this is a more general statement
  of the principle that lies behind the Golden
  Rule Always treat others as you would have
  them treat you.

15
Revising Utilitarianism?

• Using People as Means Always act such that you
  treat humanity, whether in your own person or
  that of another, always as an end in itself and
  never as a means only.
• Immanuel Kant
• Analysis Perhaps whats wrong with killing one
  patient to save six is that it would be using the
  one as a mere means for the benefit of others.
• -We use others as means all the time Does this
  principle imply that it is morally problematical
  to do so?
• -Once again, we need to consider what it means
  to treat a person as a mere means, and make it
  quite clear.

16
Using Ethical Theories to Make Judgments and
Decisions

• Ethical theories can give us insight into the
  morally salient features of the choices we face.
• By reflecting on the principles that lie behind
  our moral choices, we may come to make better
  choices, and to gain a deeper understanding of
  ourselves.
• Ethical theories cannot provide a simple recipe
  for correct moral decision-making. It is always
  necessary to use reflective judgment, to ask
  whether there are other morally significant
  factors to consider.

17
W.D. Ross List of Prima Facie Duties

• 1) Duties that rest on previous acts of my own.
• a) Promises.
• b) Previous wrongs in need of reparation.
• 2) Duties that rest on previous acts of others
• (Example gratitude)
• 3) Duties of justice (A duty to endeavor to bring
  the distribution of pleasure or happiness in line
  with merit.)
• 4) Beneficence- Duty to benefit others.
• 5) Duty to improve one's own virtue or
  intelligence.
• 6) Duty not to harm or injure others.

18

• Joel Feinberg
• List of Prima Facie Obligations
• 1) Fidelity- Obligation to keep promises.
• 2) Veracity- Obligation to tell the truth, or
  (or better-- not to tell lies).
• 3) Fair Play- Obligation not to exploit, cheat,
  or "free load" on others
• 4) Gratitude- Obligation to return favors
• 5) Nonmaleficence- Obligation not to cause harm,
  pain or suffering to others,
• 6) Beneficence- Obligation to help others in
  distress, at least when this involves no great
  danger to oneself or to third parties.
• 7) Reparation- Obligation to repair harms to
  others that are one's fault.
• 8) Obligation not to kill others (except in
  self-defense).
• 9) Obligation not to deprive others of their
  property.
• 10) Obligation to oppose injustices, at least
  when this involves no great cost to oneself.
• 11) Obligation to promote just institutions and
  to work toward their establishment, maintenance,
  and improvement.

19
Is Ethical Decision Making Easy?

• Some ethical theories present themselves as a
  simple recipe for decision making, but it cant
  be that easy.
• Other theories present themselves as a more or
  less un-ordered list of obligations to be
  evaluated against one another using judgment.

20
What good is philosophical ethics?

• Philosophical theories cant remove the burden of
  moral decision-making.
• What philosophical theories can do is to direct
  our attention to features of our choices that
  are, or may be morally salient.

21
What good is philosophical ethics?

• Most importantly, reflection on the motives and
  principles that lie behind our choices shows that
  our moral judgments are based on reasons. By
  articulating these reasons, we gain the ability
  to evaluate them and to consider alternatives.

22
Ethical Arguments

• Argument A set of statements, some of which
  serve as premises, one of which serves as a
  conclusion, where the premises are intended to
  provide evidence for the conclusion.

23
Ethical Arguments

• When presented with an argument, one may either
• 1) Accept the premises and the conclusion
• 2) Reject the premises
• 3) Argue (or show) that the conclusion does not
  follow from the premises.

24

• Questions Requiring Ethical Judgment
• 1) Should developed countries control
  availability of GMOs in developing (poor)
  countries?
• 2) Who should make decisions regarding the use of
  land for agricultural, commercial and residential
  use?
• 3) Do animal housing systems (crates, cages etc)
  need to be altered to improve animal welfare?
• 4) Is it ethical to dehorn, brand, beak trim, or
  castrate farm animals?
• 5) Should cloning be allowed in farm animals? in
  humans?
• 6) Should wolves be reintroduced into areas
  where human activity has been responsible for
  their absence?
• 7) Should stem cell research derived from human
  embryos be allowed?
• 8) Is it ethical to eat meat?
• 9) Hunting and fishingshould it be allowed, how
  much, who can do it?
• 10) Are livestock shows ethical?

25

• Questions Requiring Ethical Judgment
• 11) Is it ethical to encourage livestock use in
  poor and developing countries?
• 12) Should livestock producers be responsible
  for air and water quality?
• 13) Is it acceptable to use animals to test
  products for human use/consumption?
• 14) Should the use of subtherapeutic antibiotics
  be banned in livestock?
• 15) Should diverse breeds of livestock be
  maintained and who should pay?
• 16) Should rodeos and circuses be allowed to
  exploit animals?
• 17) Should the use of growth enhancing agents be
  allowed in the production of farm animals?
• 19) Is it ethical to trim ears, dock tails, and
  train companion animals?
• 20) Should the family farm be maintained at the
  expense of corporate farming?
• 21) Should life be patented?

26

• Thinking Clearly about Ethical Judgments
• 1) Clearly articulate alternative positions.
• Example We (should/should not) maintain
  institutions that grant patents on living
  organisms.
• 2) Develop a list of arguments for each position,
  for and against. (This requires balance and
  fair-mindedness!)
• 3) Think about how the different reasons you have
  listed interact with one another.
• 4) Try to come to a balanced and fair conclusion,
  giving appropriate weight to all relevant reasons.

27
Some Moral Concepts

• Individual Moral Choice
• Utility
• Right and Rights
• Universality
• Virtue
• Exploitation
• Institutional Norms
• Legality
• Liberty
• Justice
• Social Utility
• Democracy
• Community

28
Norms for Individual Moral Choice

• Utility Happiness and well-being
• are typically taken to be good things,
• significant from the moral point of
• view. To argue that a policy or procedure
• would compromise happiness or create misery
• is to give reasons why its a bad thing. (Maybe
  not
• decisive reasons, since there may be other
  relevant
• considerations.)

29
Norms for Individual Moral Choice

• Right and Rights Rights are claims that people
  have against others. If a person has a right,
  then it is not permissible to do what would
  violate that right, even if doing so would
  maximize utility or have good consequences.
  Rights (if there are any) are side constraints on
  the maximization of utility.

30
Norms for Individual Moral Choice

• Universality What if everyone did that?
• Kantian principles involve an appeal to universal
  judgment.
• Example In considering whether it is legitimate
  to engineer people to be better basketball
  players, one might ask whether the general policy
  would be self-defeating If everyone did that,
  no one would be specially advantaged.

31
Norms for Individual Moral Choice

• Virtue What would a Good Person do in a
  situation like this one?
• According to Aristotle, we need to ask what
  principles of character we should inculcate into
  ourselves, and any action we undertake should be
  evaluated in terms of the effect on our character
  and judgment.
• Aristotle did not intend for his concept of
  virtue to be used for practical ethical dilemmas
  like those we will (mostly) be considering in
  this class.

32
Norms for Individual Moral Choice

• Exploitation
• We should treat people always as ends in
  themselves and never as means only.
• Immanuel Kant
• We should avoid actions that improve our
  situation at cost to those who are worse off than
  we are.
• John Rawls (paraphrase)

33
Institutional Norms

• Legality We can always ask what the law
  requires, and sometimes its relevant from the
  moral point of view. But we still need to
  consider whether the law is a good law, whether
  it is a bad law, and whether we have an
  obligation to obey (or disobey) it.

34
Institutional Norms

• Liberty
• The only purpose for which power can be
  rightfully exercised over any member of a
  civilized community, against his will, is to
  prevent harm to others. His own good, either
  physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.
  He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or
  forbear because it will be better for him to do
  so, because it will make him happier, because in
  the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or
  even right. These are good reasons for
  remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or
  persuading him, or entreating him, but not for
  compelling him of visiting him with any evil in
  case he do otherwise. () Over himself, over his
  own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.
• -J.S. Mill, On Liberty

35
Institutional Norms

• Justice Involves the fair distribution of
  burdens and benefits of social cooperation.
• Equality Equal distribution is one theory of
  justice. But sometimes it can be argued that
  unequal distributions are required by justice.

36
Institutional Norms

• Social Utility We can evaluate policies based
  on their likely consequences, and on whether the
  benefits they provide are likely to outweigh the
  burdens they impose.

37
Institutional Norms

• Democracy If policies undermine democracy or
  democratic equality, this is a powerful argument
  against them.
• Example The genetic inheritance of the earth
  belongs equally to all people. Allowing patent
  rights in organisms and species would be
  undemocratic, since it would take this right
  away.

38
Institutional Norms

• Community If a policy would undermine the bonds
  of community that link us together, this is a
  powerful argument against it.
• Example Allowing genetic manipulation and
  improvement of human beings would undermine
  social solidarity, creating a genetically normal
  and thus disadvantaged underclass.
• Michael Sandel (paraphrase).

39
Using Norms to Evaluate Cases

• Consider different normative concepts and how
  they apply to a given policy or case.
• What rights are involved?
• What will the consequences be?
• What if everyone did that?
• Is it legal?
• Does it undermine liberty?
• What does justice require?
• Is the proposal democratic?
• Would this undermine community?

40
Patenting Life Reasons Against

• Patents on life reflect a disrespect for life.
• People who gain patents on life arent really
  the creators of what they patent.
• Patents on life permit or facilitate the
  oppression of people in the developing world.
• Patents undermine peoples free right to use the
  earths genetic heritage, which should be a
  common available to everyone.
• Other reasons?

41
Patenting Life Reasons For

• Plant and animal breeders deserve protection for
  their efforts, and patents are an appropriate
  means for protection.
• Plant and animal patents promote research in
  livestock and plant varieties, improving
  agriculture for everyone.
• Appropriate patent institutions can protect the
  welfare of people in the developing world while
  protecting the rights of researchers and
  innovators.

42
Beyond For and Against

• Once you have identified the reasons and
  arguments that lie behind alternative positions,
  you may be in a position to reformulate the
  question.
• For example
• Are there intellectual property institutions
  that can protect the legitimate claims of
  researchers without causing disadvantage to
  others, and without violating other important
  moral convictions?

43
Patenting Life

• What do you think?
• One who knows only his own side of a case knows
  little of that. -Cicero.
• Only if you are able to articulate the arguments
  of those who disagree with you are you really in
  a position to defend and understand your own
  judgments.

44
What good is Ethics?

• Ethics and ethical decision making are not
  simply the province of philosophers or ethicists.
  Our choices reveal our values to the world.
  These values are either unreflective and shallow,
  or reflective and deep.
• Philosophical deliberation should help us to
  make our values and choices deep and thoughtful.
  Maybe this makes it more likely that our choices
  will be the right ones.

45

• Clark Wolf
• Director of the ISU Bioethics Program.
• Questions? Email me at jwcwolf_at_iastate.edu