The "ethical anthropic principle" and the religious ethics of Levinas

Why did Levinas choose Isaiah 45:7 ("I make peace and create evil: I the Lord do all that") as a superscription of his essay on evil? This article explores the role of evil in Levinas's religious ethics. The author discusses the structure of evil as revealed phenomenologically and juxtaposes it to the structure of subjectivity found in the writings of Levinas. The idea of the "ethical anthropic principle," modeled upon the cosmic anthropic principle, is then used to link evil to the responsibility of the subject. The link is subsequently extended to God. This is proposed as one way of understanding the meaning of Isaiah 45:7. © 2001 Journal of Religious Ethics, Inc.

The ethics of germ line gene manipulation - A five dimensional debate

Contributors to the debate surrounding the ethics of germ line gene manipulation have by and large concentrated their efforts on discussions of the potential risks that are associated with the use of this technology. Many international advisory committees have ruled out the acceptability of germ line gene manipulation at least for the time being. The purpose of this work is to generate much needed discussion on the many other ethical issues concerning the implementation of not only germ line gene manipulation but also other related biotechnologies. In this paper I systematically investigate and analyse the most salient issues put forward by proponents and opponents alike. I argue that if germ line manipulation proves to be a safe and effective procedure, then the principle of beneficence imposes on the medical profession a moral duty to pursue the technology.

The prospects for immunotherapy in smoking cessation

Context Smoking is a major preventable cause of death and disability that is maintained by dependence on nicotine. Smoking cessation reduces mortality and morbidity. Although existing pharmacological aids to smoking cessation and relapse prevention (nicotine replacement therapy and bupropion) improve on unassisted quitting and behavioural methods, they are only modestly effective. More effective pharmacological methods are required that improve compliance, reduce side-effects, and can be used in combination with existing cessation methods. Starting point A nicotine vaccine is a promising immunotherapeutic approach to smoking cessation and relapse prevention. Such a vaccine would induce the immune system to form specific antibodies to nicotine to prevent it from crossing the blood-brain barrier to act on receptor sites in the central nervous system. Recent studies in rats provide proof of principle by showing that nicotine-specific antibodies can prevent the reinstatement of nicotine self-administration (N Lindblom et al, Respiration 2002; 69: 254–60) and block dopamine release in the shell of the nucleus accumbens (Sde Villiers et al, Respiration 2002; 69: 247–53). A phase 1 trial of a human cocaine vaccine has also recently been successfully completed (T Kosten et al, Vaccine 2002; 20: 1196–204). A safe and effective human nicotine vaccine would potentially have fewer side-effects and better compliance than existing smoking-cessation pharmacotherapies. It could also be used in combination with some of them (eg, bupropion). Where next? The most promising clinical application of a human nicotine vaccine is likely to be in relapse prevention in abstinent smokers. A vaccine may also have a role in preparing smokers to quit. Clinical trials of safety and efficacy in human smokers and ex-smokers are warranted. If a nicotine vaccine proves to be safe and effective, the health-care system will need to ensure that it is registered for clinical use and that the poorer members of the community (among whom smoking prevalence is now highest in developed countries) have access to the vaccine. The community will need to be appropriately informed about the role of a nicotine vaccine to ensure that it is not prematurely used for preventive purposes in children and adolescents.

The politics and ethics of relocated art

At the end of Word War II, Soviet occupation forces removed countless art objects from German soil. Some of them were returned during the 1950s, but most either disappeared for good or were stored away secretly in cellars of Soviet museums. The Cold War then covered the issue with silence. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, museums in St Petersburg and Moscow started to exhibit some of the relocated art for the first time in half a century. The unusual quality of the paintings-mostly impressionist masterpieces-not only attracted the attention of the international art community, but also triggered a diplomatic row between Russia and Germany. Both governments advanced moral and legal claims to ownership. To make things even more complicated, many of the paintings once belonged to private collectors, some of whom were Jews. Their descendants also entered the dispute. The basic premise of this article is that the political and ethical dimensions of relocated art can be understood most adequately by eschewing a single authorial standpoint. Various positions, sometimes incommensurable ones, are thus explored in an attempt to outline possibilities for an ethics of representation and a dialogical solution to the international problem that relocated art has become.