9 results found (0.005 seconds)
— There is a contrast between two conceptions of medicine: According to the first, which we call “The New Medicine,” medicine comprises a set of technical skills that are to be put to work in service of patient-client preferences. Health care workers are in essence providers of services, and these services are for the sake of patient well-being, understood entirely in terms of the patient’s satisfaction of her subjective preferences and desires. Thus, medicine becomes de-moralized, and its proper ethic becomes what the philosopher H. Tristram Engelhardt has identified as a “morality of strangers” (Engelhardt, 1996) We call the second view The Traditional Approach, and see it as operating along two converging “ways”, which we will call the Way of Medicine, and the Way of the Natural Law. Our claim is that these two ways comprise the best understanding of both the nature of medicine and the medical profession, and the norms that medical professionals should take as authoritatively guiding in shaping, and thus also in acting in accordance with, their consciences....
— John Haldane unpacks two key ideas at the core of secular liberalism.
— This conversation is part of the Immanuel Kant Series | 'Dare to know!' Philosophy Podcast. Today we are joined by Onora O’Neill. Onora O’Neill is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge, a crossbench member of the House of Lords and a former President of the British Academy (2005–2009). She has extensively published articles and books related to the work of Immanuel Kant. In this conversation, we talk in particular about her book ‘Constructing Authorities: Reason, Politics and Interpretation in Kant’s Philosophy’’. In this episode of the Dare to know! Podcast we discuss Kant’s views on reason, authority, autonomy, public reason & more. Enjoy watching! PODCAST CHANNELS: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5IaosTbUJoULAKeDk2eNk0?si=4_eCcYcWQN2mZXE1WOwRTw ITunes/Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/nl/podcast/dare-to-know-philosophy-podcast/id1508888549 GUEST INFO: https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/fellows/onora-oneill-FBA HOST INFO: My name is Fabian Corver, living in the Netherlands. I graduated last year from my Master's in Philosophy at the University of Glasgow. Currently, working for AI-focused start-up and reading lots of philosophy at night. JOIN DISCORD (KANT & CHOMSKY READING GROUP): https://discordapp.com/invite/maAyDxU OUTLINE: 0:00 - Introduction 0:45 - Background 1:40 - Book: Constructing Authorities 3:06 - Project of vindicating reason 5:38 - The notion of 'construction' 8:14 - The Faculties of Reason & Understanding 10:11 - A reflexive task 12:49 - Vindication or Proof of Reason? 13:55 - "Reason is no dictator!" 15:37 - Is our rationality limited? 16:43 - Objections against vindication of Reason 18:04 - Anarchism: rejecting the notion of authority? 20:12 - The role of metaphors 21:33 - Public Reason & Private Reason 23:44 - Rawls' Constructivism 25:43 - Starting point: A Plurality of Agents 28:16 - Kant's notion of autonomy 33:10 - Kant's notion of public reason into practice 34:30 - Self-legislation 35:24 - Kant: A Social Contract Theorist? 36:42 - Kant: a political idealist or realist? 39:20 - Kant's notion of 'reasoned hope'
— Here, I provide an overview of Principlism, as developed by Beauchamp and Childress. This is the final video in a series on moral theory as it relates to bioethics. To view videos in the series in sequence, see: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIF6-Lrew26u5xcPSzajzWqn3UrOZJQgk _________ Music used for the intro and outro is: Track: When you Realize — Mauro Somm [Audio Library Release] Music provided by Audio Library Plus Watch: https://youtu.be/CPZ0ZQ6Zxyk Free Download / Stream: https://alplus.io/when-you-realize
— Beauchamp and Childress's famous biomedical ethics textbook "Principles of Biomedical Ethics" has had a significant impact on the education of ethics for those who work in medicine. Chapter 4 "Respect for Autonomy" is the central focus of this video. In this lecture, I explain the major moves in the text, discussing theories of autonomy (and critiques of alternate views), the criteria and concepts involved in competence for making an informed consent, such as having sufficient disclosure, adequate understanding, and a meaningful sense of being voluntary. What is the basis for why consent even matters, if professionals know what is best? What makes someone's decision to accept treatment a bone fide case of informed consent? What happens if we introduce a surrogate to make the decision on someone's behalf? http://www.jonathanvajda.com Email: [email protected] for questions, topic recommendations, interviews, direct instruction arrangements, etc. Twitter: @jonathanvajda If you want to say thanks with a tip or gift (say, buy me coffee?), see my support landing page: https://jonathanvajda.com/support/ 00:00 - Overview and the shift toward respect for autonomy 08:25 - Theories of autonomy and some objections 24:24 - Respecting autonomy and individual rights (both positive and negative rights) 37:21 - Obtaining consent 40:51 - Competence - the concept, the criteria, and the check 49:36 - The essentials of informed consent 53:30 - The standards of adequate disclosure 1:15:29 - Forms of influence, legitimate and coercive
— There is a contrast between two conceptions of medicine: According to the first, which we call “The New Medicine,” medicine comprises a set of technical skills that are to be put to work in service of patient-client preferences. Health care workers are in essence providers of services, and these services are for the sake of patient well-being, understood entirely in terms of the patient’s satisfaction of her subjective preferences and desires. Thus, medicine becomes de-moralized, and its proper ethic becomes what the philosopher H. Tristram Engelhardt has identified as a “morality of strangers” (Engelhardt, 1996) We call the second view The Traditional Approach, and see it as operating along two converging “ways”, which we will call the Way of Medicine, and the Way of the Natural Law. Our claim is that these two ways comprise the best understanding of both the nature of medicine and the medical profession, and the norms that medical professionals should take as authoritatively guiding in shaping, and thus also in acting in accordance with, their consciences....
— For more on this event, visit: http://bit.ly/TPGh1R For more on the Berkley Center, visit: http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu September 20, 2012 | Can the law promote moral values even in pluralistic societies such as the United States? In a new book, Law's Virtues: Fostering Autonomy and Solidarity in American Society, legal scholar and moral theologian Cathleen Kaveny (Notre Dame) argues that it can. In conversation with thinkers as diverse as Thomas Aquinas, Pope John Paul II, and Joseph Raz, she argues that the law rightly promotes the values of autonomy and solidarity. At the same time, she cautions that wise lawmakers will not enact mandates that are too far out of step with the lived moral values of the actual community. At this lunchtime seminar, Professor Kaveny presented her book and discussed the relevance of her argument for American politics and society across a range of critical issues. M. Cathleen Kaveny is John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law and Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame and studies issues at the intersection of law, religion, and morality; she has particular expertise in health care ethics. Her research has appeared in scholarly journals such as the Wake Forest Law Review, and she serves on the editorial boards of the American Journal of Jurisprudence, The Journal of Religious Ethics, the Journal of Law and Religion, and The Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics. Kaveny has written for the Catholic magazine Commonweal since 2004 and contributes to The Washington Post/Newsweek site "On Faith." She also participates in the Catholic Common Ground Initiative. Kaveny holds an AB from Princeton University and a MA, MPhil, JD, and PhD from Yale University.
— A 20th Anniversary Conference in honor of Joseph Raz's "The Morality of Freedom". In three parts. Part 1: "Autonomy and Culture" - Speaker: Jeremy Waldron, New York University School of Law - Respondent: Alex Tuckness, Iowa State University - Moderator: Robert P. George, Princeton University (Oct 20, 2006 at Princeton University)
— A 20th Anniversary Conference in honor of Joseph Raz's "The Morality of Freedom". In three parts. Part 3: "Inquiry as a Social Form" - Speaker: Christopher Tollefsen, University of South Carolina - Respondent: Elizabeth Harman, Princeton University - Moderator: Tamsin K. Shaw, Princeton University (Oct 20, 2006 at Princeton University)
‘Autonomy’ and its opposite ‘heteronomy’ derive from nomos the Greek for ‘law’, with the prefixes ‘auto’ and ‘hetero’ again from Greek terms meaning ‘self’ and ‘other’ respectively. Thus someone, or some entity that is autonomous is self-governing, while that which is heteronomous is ruled by someone or something else. Particularly since the eighteenth-century autonomy has come to be seen as a desirable status reflecting a subject’s capacity for, and right of self-direction. In the case of morality this is connected to notions of self-worth and rational agency; in the case of politics to the idea of independent nationhood or statehood. Put another way autonomy is viewed as freedom from control or servitude. While there are few outright critics of autonomy some philosophers regard an emphasis on it as overlooking or denying the extent of dependence on others, which they argue is not an obstacle but a means to self-development and well-being as we are social animals whose flourishing is in communities.