2013Marek Vácha

E.O. Wilson

the organism is only DNA´s way of making more DNA the hypothalamus and limbic system are

engineered to perpetuate DNA these centers flood our consciousnessn with all

the emotions – hate, love, guilt, fear, and others – that are consulted by ethical philosophers who wish to intuit the standards of good and evil

(Wilson, E.O., (2000) Sociobiology. The New Synthesis. Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Edition. The Belknap Press of Harward University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England. p. 3)

E.O. Wilson

The hypothalamic-limbic complex of a highly social species, such as man, „knows“, or more precisly it has been programmed to perform as if it knows, that its underlying genes will be proliferated maximally only if it orchestrates behavioral responses that bring into play an efficient mixture of personal survival, reproduction, and altruism

(Wilson, E.O., (2000) Sociobiology. The New Synthesis. Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Edition. The Belknap Press of Harward University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England. p. 4)

Common Morality

is a product of human experience and history and is a universaly shared product

is found in all cultures is not relative to cultures and individuals,

because it transcends both (Beauchamp, T.L., Childress, J.F., (2009) Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. Oxford University Press,

New York, Oxford, p. 4)

Common Morality

a sense of mutuality, justice, generosity (perhaps in reciprocal giving)

a deep reverence for all life (f.e. in settling conflicts, in punishing violence, in dealing with nature)

particular rules for the sexes living together (f.e. the prohibition of incest and a rejection of libertinism)

great respect for parents (and at the same time care of children)

Herodotus (5th century BC): During Darius´s reign, he invited some Greeks who were present to a conference, and ask them how much money it would take for them to be prepared to eat the corpses of their fathers; they replied that they would not do that for any amount of money. Next, Darius summoned some members of the Indian tribe known as Callatiae, who eat their parents, and asked them in the presence of the Greeks, with an interpreter present so that they could understand what was being said, how much money it would take for them to be willing to cremate their fathers´ corpses; they cried out in horror and told him not to say such appalling things. So these practises have become enshrined as customs just as they are, and I think Pindar was right to have said in his poem that custom is king of all.

(Blackburn, S., (2001) Ethics. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 18)

person = a member of moral community the idea of restricting moral standing to

only those humans with certain characteristics has led in the past to racism, sexism, and religious intolerance.

animals?

women

nationalities(nazism)

colour of skin(American Civil War)

people in the same geographical locality

tribe

family

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 7 All are equal before the law and are entitled

without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Animals

virtually every nation has guidelines to alleviate, diminish, or otherwise limit what can be done to animals in biomedical research

it is today generally accepted that experimental animals have some form of moral status, but it is less clear what warrants this judgement and whether our obligations to these animals also imply that they have rights

(Beauchamp, T.L., Childress, J.F., (2009) Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford, p. 66)

(Nash, R.F., (1989) The Rights of Nature. A History of Environmental Ethics. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, London. p. 5)

The dignity of living beings with regard to plants. Moral consideration of plants for their own sake Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) The general ethical questions are whether, and

why, plants should be protected. There are two possible arguments to justify the protection of plants: either that they should be protected for their own sake, or that they should be protected for the sake of others. That plants should in some circumstances be protected in the interest of a third party, e.g. because they are useful to humans, is undisputed. Independent of the term dignity of living beings, then, the central question therefore remains: whether plants have an inherent worth, and should therefore be protected for their own sake.

The dignity of living beings with regard to plants. Moral consideration of plants for their own sake Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) The ECNH’s discussion differentiated three concepts of value: Instrumental value: Plants should not be protected for their

own sake, but because and as long as they are of benefit to humans (or other organisms), e.g. as crops or as part of biodiversity.

Relational value: Plants should not be protected for their own sake, but because someone considers them to be worthy of protection. Their protection-worthiness is in relation to a value ascribed to them because of particular properties. For example, a tree may have a particular value for an observer, because it was planted in memory of a person who has died. An aesthetic value is also a relational value.

Inherent worth: Plants possess inherent worth. This inherent worth means they should be protected for their own sake.

The dignity of living beings with regard to plants. Moral consideration of plants for their own sake Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH)

The great majority of the ECNH members holds the opinion that prima facie we do not possess unrestricted power over plants. We may not use them just as we please, even if the plant community is not in danger, or if our actions do not endanger the species, or if we are not acting arbitrarily.

The dignity of living beings with regard to plants. Moral consideration of plants for their own sake. Conclusions Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) 1. Arbitrariness: The Committee members unanimously consider an arbitrary harm

caused to plants to be morally impermissible. This kind of treatment would include, e.g. decapitation of wild flowers at the roadside without rational reason.

2. Instrumentalisation: For the majority the complete instrumentalisation of plants – as a collective, as a species, or as individuals – requires moral justification.

3. Ownership of plants: For the majority here too, plants – as a collective, as a species, or as individuals – are excluded for moral reasons from absolute ownership. By this interpretation no one may handle plants entirely according to his/her own desires. A minority concludes that no limits apply to handling plants insofar as they are property.

4. Genetic modification: According to the majority position, there is nothing to contradict the idea of dignity of living beings in the genetic modification of plants, as long as their independence, i.e. reproductive ability and adaptive ability are ensured. Social-ethical limits on the genetic modification of plants may exist, but are not the object of this discussion.

6. Diversity: Genetic modification of plants should, in the majority opinion, always involve consideration of conserving and safeguarding the natural, i.e. not man-made, network of relationships.

7. Proportionality: A majority considers any action with or towards plants that serves the self-preservation of humans to be morally justified, as long as it is appropriate and follows the principle of precaution.

What is a person…?

human eggs? embryos or fetuses? newborns? the brain dead? nonhuman animals? cybrids?

enemies in war different races women and children

What is a person…?

human eggs? embryos or fetuses? newborns? anencephalic babies? the brain dead? nonhuman animals? cybrids?

and if not, what elevates the autonomous human above members of the groups just listed?

What is a person…?

A common, but controversial, presumption in medicine and biomedical ethics is that some groups have no moral rights (e.g.

animals used in biomedical research) and that other groups have fewer or weaker rights (e.g.

humans who have been judged incompetent have diminished, if any, rights to decide for themselves)

(Beauchamp, T.L., Childress, J.F., (2009) Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford, p. 65)

A Theory Based on

biological species cognitive capacity moral agency sentience communal relationship

A Theory Based on

empirical functionalism cognitive capacity moral agency sentience communal relationship

ontological personalism biological species

Empirical functionalism

a personhood begins some time later than conception and can be lost (f.e. in the extreme stages of dementia or in a persistent vegetative state) well before the physical death of the individual

A Theory based on Cognitive Properties a person has to have :

self-consciousness freedom to act and capacity to engage in

purposeful actions ability to give and to appreciate reasons for

acting capacity to communicate with other persons

using a language rationality and higher order volition

A Theory Based on Sentience

person = a being capable of feeling pain a pleasure

having the capacity of sentience is a sufficient condition of moral status pain is an evil, pleasure a good to cause pain to any entity is to harm it even if you were not cognitively capable,

morally capable, or biologically human, pain and suffering would be real to you

A Theory Based on Sentience

in this theory a fetus does have moral status at some point after several weeks of development, and thus abortions at that point would be prima facie impermissible this point is prior to the stage of development

at which some legal abortions now occur.

A Theory Based on Sentiencecritique

any individual lacking the capacity for sentience lacks moral status this theory disallows moral status for early-staged

fetuses as well as for all who have irreversibly lost the capacity for sentience, such as patients with severe brain damage

the degree of moral status and the level of moral protection can vary according to conditions such as the quality, richness, or complexity of life as loss of capacity occurs, humans (and nonhumans)

will have a decreased moral status In this way, the most vulnerable beings can become

the most vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. No theory is morally acceptable that yields this conditions

A Theory Based on Moral Agency

a person… is capable of making moral judgments about

the rightness or wrongness of actions has the motives that can be judged morally

= capacity for moral agency gives an individual moral respect and dignity

Peter Singer

„human being“ and „human person“ person = being able to feel pleasentness and

unpleasentness patient in PVS or human embryo is not a

person, a dog is.

Peter Singer

if we set a moral frame to incorporate all the people, a lot of animals are inside as well

if we set a moral frame to incorporate no animals, a lot of people are left out as well.

Peter Singer

creatures included in Singer´s moral community has to posses nervous systems of sufficient sophistication to feel pain

ethics ceases to apply somewhere „between a shrimp and oyster.“ ethics ends at „the boundary of sentience.“

the fact that a deer does not think like a person was no more relevant in the assignation of rights than the advanced quality of Einstein´s thought compared to an average person´s.

Empirical Functionalism

„person“

Peter Singer

„person“

person = an entity capable of feeeling pain and pleasure

ethics ceases to apply somewhere „between a shrimp and oyster.“

Peter Singer"We protest his hiring because Dr. Singer denies the intrinsic moral worth of an entire class of human beings - newborn children - and promotes policies that would deprive many infants with disabilities of their basic human right to legal protection against homicide." ... Princeton University student petition protesting Peter Singer's hiring.

Joseph Fletcher: "postnatal abortion"

Peter Singer

"When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of the happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if the killing of the hemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others it would be right to kill him." (Practical Ethics)

Speciesism (P. Singer)

= the belief, that we are entitled to treat members of other species in a way in which it would be wrong to treat members of our own.

Specieism

„If we compare a severely defective human infant with a nonhuman animal, a dog, a pig, for example, we will often find the nonhuman to have superior capacities, both actual and potential, for rationality, self-consciousness, communication, and anything else that can plausibly be considered morally significant. Only the fact that the defective infant is a member of the species homo sapiens, leads it to be treated differently from the dog or pig.“

Singer, P., (1983) Sanctity of life or quality of life. Pediatrics,72:128-129

A Theory Based on Relationships

relationships between parties account for moral status

the less the degree to which the fetus can be said to be part of a social matrix, the weaker the argument for regarding her/him as having the same moral status as persons

once fetuses are detected in utero by stethoscope or sonogram, they become in significant respects part of a social matrix

A Theory Based on Relationshipscritique

is it true, that only social bonds and attitudes alone determine moral status?

the different degrees of moral status, such as moral agents having a higher degree of status than individuals lacking such agency

no matter how much we love a favorite plant or institution, neither the plant nor the institution gains status by virtue of this relationship

Stephen Hawking

Ontologický personalismus

„person“

Ontologický personalismus

„person“

Nazism

Critique

dividing Homo sapiens sapiens to two groups black x white germans x non-germans communists x noncommunists in-group x out-group beings x persons

...was not good in any case The attempt to produce Heaven on Earth

often produces Hell. (Karl Popper)

Ontological Personalism

„person“

A Theory Based on Human Properties All humans have full moral status and only

humans have that status an individual has moral status if and only if

that inidividual is conceived by human parents, or is an organism with a human genetic code

to be a living member of the species Homo sapiens sapiens is a necessary and sufficient condition of moral respect

A Theory Based on Human Properties no human is excluded on the basis of a

property such as being a fetus, having brain damage, or having a congenital anomaly.

the moral status of human infants, mentally disabeld humans, and those with a permanent loss of consciousness is not in doubt

A Theory Based on Human Properties all humans have human rights, whether or

not the rights are legally recognized in a political state

OntologicalPersonalism

„person“

Aquinas

„the father provide the form, the mother the matter. The male provide the seed; the female the soil.“

Homunculus

it was not until the 1870s that scientists became certain conception was the union of the sperm and egg

and it was not until the 1900s that the relationship between menstruation and the time of conception was fully understood in fact, the absence of menses in a pregnant

woman suggested to many that the embryo was formed from woman´s menstrual material, and that the man´s semen somehow molded this material into an embryo

(Gilbert, S.C., Tyler, A.L., Zackin, E.J., (2005) Bioethics and the New Embryology. Sinauer Associates, Inc. W.H. Freeman & comp. Sunderland, MA U.S.A. p. 32)

New York 1948: Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. (Article 2)

Another Approach

1. consciousness of objects and events

2. the ability to feel pain

3. reasoning

4. self-motivated activity

5. the capacity to communicate

6. a concept of the self

(Edge, R.S., Groves, J.R., (2007) Ethics of Health care. A Guide for Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. Thomson, Delmar Learning. NY. p.261)

Another Approach: a critique

1. consciousness of objects and events2. the ability to feel pain3. reasoning

what sort of reasoning? and what people in PVS?

4. self-motivated activity5. the capacity to communicate

newborns cannot communicate = infanticide would be permissible

6. a concept of the self

(Edge, R.S., Groves, J.R., (2007) Ethics of Health care. A Guide for Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. Thomson, Delmar Learning. NY. p.261)

...taught us the paradoxical truth that nations survive not by wealth but by the help they give to the poor, not by power but by the care they extend to the weak. Civilisation become invulnerable only when they care for the vulnerable.

Sacks, J., (2011) The Great Partnership. God, Science and the Search for Meaning. Hodder & Stoughton, London. p.290