99 resultados para Ethics in Bioart
Resumo:
Éditoral / Editorial
Resumo:
Étude de cas / Case study
Resumo:
Compte-rendu / Review
Resumo:
Article
Resumo:
Full Text / Article complet
Resumo:
This paper examines several families of population principles in the light of a set of axioms. In addition to the critical-level utilitarian, number-sensitive critical-level utilitarian and number-dampened families and their generalized counterparts, we consider the restricted number-dampened family (suggested by Hurka) and introduce two new families : the restricted critical-level and restricted number-dependent critical-level families. Subsets of the restricted families have nonnegative critical levels and avoid both the repugnant and sadistic conclusions but fail to satisfy an important independence condition. We defend the critical-level principles with positive critical levels.
Resumo:
Public policies often involve choices of alternatives in which the size and the composition of the population may vary. Examples are the allocation of resources to prenatal care and the design of aid packages to developing countries. In order to assess the corresponding feasible choices on normative grounds, criteria for social evaluation that are capable of performing variable-population comparisons are required. We review several important axioms for welfarist population principles and discuss the link between individual well-being and the desirability of adding a new person to a given society.
Resumo:
This paper reviews the welfarist approach to population ethics. We provide an overview of the critical-level utilitarian population principles and their generalized counterparts, examine important properties of these principles and discuss their relationships to other variable-population social-evaluation rules. We illustrate the difficulties arising in population ethics by means of an impossibility result and present characterizations of the critical-level generalized-utilitarian principles and of three of their sub-classes.
Resumo:
L’émergence de l’utilisation du méthylphénidate (MPH; Ritalin) par des étudiants universitaires afin d’améliorer leur concentration et leurs performances universitaires suscite l’intérêt du public et soulève d’importants débats éthiques auprès des spécialistes. Les différentes perspectives sur l’amélioration des performances cognitives représentent une dimension importante des défis sociaux et éthiques autour d’un tel phénomène et méritent d’être élucidées. Ce mémoire vise à examiner les discours présents dans les reportages internationaux de presse populaire, les discours en bioéthique et en en santé publique sur le thème de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate. Cette recherche a permis d’identifier et d’analyser des « lacunes » dans les perspectives éthiques, sociales et scientifiques de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive d’individus en santé. Une analyse systématique du contenu des discours sur l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive a identifié des paradigmes divergents employés pour décrire l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate et discuter ses conséquences éthiques. Les paradigmes « choix de mode de vie », « abus de médicament » et « amélioration de la cognition » sont présents dans les discours de la presse populaire, de la bioéthique et de la santé publique respectivement. Parmi les principales différences entre ces paradigmes, on retrouve : la description de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques pour l’amélioration des performances, les risques et bénéfices qui y sont associés, la discussion d’enjeux éthiques et sociaux et des stratégies de prévention et les défis associés à l’augmentation de la prévalence de ce phénomène. La divergence de ces paradigmes reflète le pluralisme des perceptions de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques Nos résultats suggèrent la nécessité de débats autour de l’amélioration neuropharmacologique afin de poursuivre l’identification des enjeux et de développer des approches de santé publique cohérentes.
Resumo:
Despite the growing popularity of participatory video as a tool for facilitating youth empowerment, the methodology and impacts of the practice are extremely understudied. This paper describes a study design created to examine youth media methodology and the ethical dilemmas that arose in its attempted implementation. Specifically, elements that added “rigor” to the study (i.e., randomization, pre- and post-measures, and an intensive interview) conflicted with the fundamental tenets of youth participation. The paper concludes with suggestions for studying participatory media methodologies that are more in line with an ethics of participation.
Resumo:
This paper challenges the assumption that youth and youth agencies are in a condition of equality when entering a participatory action research (PAR). By asserting that it is not a state of equality that practitioners nor youth should assume nor be immediately striving for, but a consistently equitable process, this article draws from and reflects on the relationship between young people and researchers who have used a PAR methodology in action oriented projects. Using the UNESCO Growing up in Cities Canada project as a case example, this review extrapolates from and reflects on challenges faced by the project as a whole. Using semi-structured interviews to explore the roles of adults and youth, a number of strategies are highlighted as the techniques used to overcome these challenges. The discussion concludes with further reflection on the complexities of equality and equity, recommending a number of actions that have the potential to create an equitable environment in PAR projects similar to the one examined.
Resumo:
This study focuses on the engagement of children and youth in their communities and the ways they are included in and excluded from community life. Using a content analysis of a small town United States newspaper over a one-year period, examples of engagement were identified and classified into 12 categories: programs, clubs and special events; fundraising and community service; business and community support; participation in community events; school events; athletic and other performances; employment; involvement in local planning and decision making; serving as a community representative; visibility and recognition; criminal activity and accidents; and use of public space. Examples of community exclusion were identified as well. Young people were engaged primarily through activities that were adult-directed or supervised, or organized through schools, churches, and youth clubs. There was little involvement in local planning, decision making, or activism. Some evidence existed of peer teaching, leadership, and self-initiated activities, as well as intentional efforts by adults to give youth a greater voice in community activities. Implications include several ethical issues regarding the role of young people in community life, particularly young children, and the need for greater awareness on the part of communities of the contributions young people can make.
Resumo:
My aim in the present paper is to develop a new kind of argument in support of the ideal of liberal neutrality. This argument combines some basic moral principles with a thesis about the relationship between the correct standards of justification for a belief/action and certain contextual factors. The idea is that the level of importance of what is at stake in a specific context of action determines how demanding the correct standards to justify an action based on a specific set of beliefs ought to be. In certain exceptional contexts –where the seriousness of harm in case of mistake and the level of an agent’s responsibility for the outcome of his action are specially high– a very small probability of making a mistake should be recognized as a good reason to avoid to act based on beliefs that we nonetheless affirm with a high degree of confidence and that actually justify our action in other contexts. The further steps of the argument consist in probing 1) that the fundamental state’s policies are such a case of exceptional context, 2) that perfectionist policies are the type of actions we should avoid, and 3) that policies that satisfy neutral standards of justification are not affected by the reasons which lead to reject perfectionist policies.
Resumo:
The purpose of this paper is, first, to investigate the interconnections of substantive freedoms, which are indispensable for every individual to “lead the kind of lives they have reason to value” (Sen, 1999b, p.10,18), and which have legitimate and ethical reasons to be publicly secured, second, to investigate a conception of public-provision unit that embodies “the right to well-being freedom”, and a conception of decision-making unit that corresponds to it, based on the perspective of Sen’s capability theory and its extension, comparing with that of Rawls’ Theory of Justice and A Law of People. If we intend to construct such a public-provision unit, which conducts redistribution as a whole, and which receives every individual who cannot belong to any fixed local group, what kind of a body should we assume as a public-provision unit? And further, what kind of a body should we assume as a decision-making unit, which is responsible for deciding or revising the basic conceptions of public provision unit?
Resumo:
La pensée égalitariste a traditionnellement promu l’idéal d’un système de santé universel, gratuit et accessible à tous les membres de la société. J’appuie cette position en répliquant tout d’abord à la critique qui prétend que les riches tireraient plus d’avantages que les pauvres de la gratuité du système de santé. J’ouvre ensuite la réflexion sur ce qui me semble être un enjeu crucial pour l’avenir des systèmes modernes de santé : le rationnement de l’offre. Cette idée ne plaît généralement pas à la population, aux décideurs politiques et à de nombreux égalitaristes. Je considère pourtant que les principaux arguments invoqués contre le rationnement sont incohérents ou faussement égalitaristes. La gratuité des services de santé n’est pas incompatible avec la limitation de l’offre publique.