Week 1 Flashcards
Medical humanism
The central tenets of humanism are:
-the human beings matter that their wellbeing or suffering represent real phenomena
-the goal of human societies is to promote human flourishing
-science reason and understanding are a central means of achieving human flourishing
-all human beings are equally valuable
Medicine and other healthcare professions are relentlessly humanist
Our specific bent is to promote human flourishing through improving health
Modern discourse is now steeped in humanist principles:
-individualism and individual rights
-wellbeing
-equality, equity and social justice
And of course the NHS is a profoundly humanist statement that all humans regardless of wealth or status are entitled to the same healthcare, based on need alone
Competing worldviews
Humanism is not the only perspective prominent in modern societies: theism, ecocentrism, collectivism
Most societies endorse ideas of social or moral worth to promote prosocial behaviour but by a pure humanist reckoning, prosocial behaviours cannot alter your value
Other ethical perspectives disagree
- eg utilitarians might argue that having dependents makes one more valuable
Most of us are relatively reluctant to completely disown ideas of relative social worth eg criminals
Humanity
There is something special about humans any human is worthy of our moral concern
These ideas have been around a long time
Aristotle de anima: human soul 5+ergon use reason, sensitive soul (animals) 3 ergon move perceive desire, vegetative soul (plants) 2 ergon reproduce assimilate
Thomas aquinas: believed in a similar soul hierarchy to Aristotle
Held that humans were important as “rational animals” and on this basis they were worthy of moral concern
However this basis does not guarantee equality for humans- aquinas believed women were less rational than men and therefore subject to their authority and less important
Applying this principle more broadly what is importance of: children, those with learning disabilities, those with brain injuries preventing rational activity
Humanism and humanity
Humanism (15th century onwards)
-humans are important and valuable in their own right
-human fulfillment is of importance as is working towards the good of all
-the universe is material and may be understood through science
-human flourishing and happiness should be cultivated through study and application
-human lives are assumed to be of equal value
Humanist discourse
Achieved dominance in the aftermath of WW2 and the atrocities of the holocaust. The evil inherent in identifying some groups as less human and less valuable than others was unmistakable
Significant progress was made in pursuit of civil rights of ethnic minorities in most western nations in the decades that followed
Many humanist institutions were created in the aftermath- eg UN declaration of human rights (1948); ECHR (1950); the NHS (1948)
However were still a long way from a humanist world:
-rights are often tied to citizenship, the handling of refugees has become a flashpoint
-our economic system openly exploits the developing world
-misogyny is engrained and endemic with 90% of the worlds population holding prejudices against women and double standards based on sex
-disability driscrimination is still prevalent and disabled people have many barriers to the access of goods and services (ONS 2022)
-capital punishment still exists in several countries including USA, Iran, Saudi Arabia, japan, Somalia, South Sudan, and the democratic republic of Congo
Medicine is founded on values of humanism
But is uniquely confronted by marginal cases
-what is life
-how do we define what is human
—genomics, consciousness, social behaviours, empathy
Are all humans equally human
Sanctity
Possibly the broadest of definitions
Approach adopted by several major world relations
A deity has created humans and given them souls
Human life is therefore sacred in a way animal life is not and all human life should be protected
The nature of the soul has never been comprehensively defined and cannot be materially measured or established
Not every religion holds to this model
-paganism holds that all life is sacred not just human life
-Hinduism holds a hierarchy over animals but advocates non violence towards them, and some animals have special significance eg cattle
-Jainism will not allow violence towards animals even in self defence
-Native American belief systems hold that the soul is the source of life and thought, an immaterial essence- animating humans, animals and even plants
Sanctity limitations
Many humans do not believe this and linking moral status to religious beliefs is unlikely to be appealing to those who do not
Many of the same religions that advocate sanctity of life do not advocate for equality of humans eg believers> non believers, men>women priests> laity, faithful> sinners
Such belief systems have not protected from atrocities in the past
Moral status
6 grounds for moral concern:
-sanctity
-autonomy
-sentience
-personhood
-potentiality
-patient
Autonomy (kantian theory)
Kant believed that what made humans unique and important was their will- the ability to act according to the law rather than impulse or desire
The only thing with any intrinsic value is a good will- a will which acts according to a moral law
Since anything without a will (ie is not autonomous) cannot have a good will it follows that it has no intrinsic value
Therefore anything which is not autonomous has no intrinsic value
Limitations of autonomy
Few are the human beings who act invariably according to a moral law, and in any case moral laws can differ significantly
Many are the ways for a human being to lose autonomy, permanently or temporarily does this mean we cease to have intrinsic value
No ones will is incorruptable- coercion, threat, even torture can force a person to behave in ways they would not choose
Rationality is now believed to be an enlightenment myth- human decision making is complex and much occurs at a subconscious level
Sentience
What is a sentient being
“ the capacity to experience episodes of positively or negatively valenced awareness”
The ability to feel pleasure or pain
If a being is sentient then it has direct moral status, most animals are sentient
Therefore most animals have direct moral status
Limitations of sentience
Most people accept that animals are sentient
But not all to the same degree eg pescetarians
Sentience is not the easiest thing to gauge
Few people would accept equal moral status for animals and humans regardless of the capacity for pleasure and pain
Concepts of sentience change with time they are cultural
Up until 1987 doctors didn’t believe newborns felt pain
Personhood (or sapience)
It is being a person rather than being human that gives us moral worth
Related consciousness
Being a person is not just a biological matter
-ability to have certain continuous mental states- a prevailing consciousness, memories, a narrative of self and identity, desires for the future, rational thoughts etc
-if continuous mental states are no longer possible personhood can be lost
Limitations personhood (or sapience)
This is a very high bar for achieving moral concern- most childhood development experts think personhood isn’t developed until around 2
On the other hand some other mammals display at least some signs of personhood- elephants remember events and individuals for prolonged periods of time and mourn death
Personhood is also difficult to evaluate especially in those with communication difficulties
The philosopher peter singer argued that there is no quality that makes humans uniquely deserving of moral concern distinct from animals
-any quality you might identify to distinguish them will not be held by all humans (marginal cases)
-any quality that does cover all humans will also cover some animals
Personhood anthropologists
Anthropologists have pointed out that in societies where animals were not domesticated (farmed for meat or milk), animals are almost invariably considered to have spiritual worth, personalities and even intellect
Some have proposed that the denial of personhood to animals may be strategy to lessen the cognitive dissonance from the fact we are keeping them in conditions they would not choose and exploiting them
There are parallels with historical oppression of groups of humans who have been termed lesser in order to justify their control and exploitation
Potentiality
A being can be worthy of moral concern even if it has no qualities that would make it worthy of concern at the moment- if it might achieve those qualities in the future
Eg not currently sentient but might become so, does not currently have personhood but might
This has some attractions eg young children would have the same quotient of moral concern as everyone else
Potentiality limitations
But what about those who can expect no improvement in their condition does that mean we should be less concerned about them
What about those whose prognosis is to deteriorate
What role does the probability of attaining this status have in this approach
Almost everything would have some potential given long enough a lump of carbon could be sentient