Bioethics 1st exam

gimuxeju's version from 2015-05-27 11:38

Section 1

Question Answer
Claimis a statement we would like our audience to accept as true.
Argument is a claim supported by reasons.
Our conclusionthe claim we would like to ultimately defend.
PremisesClaims we offer in support of the conclusion
Explanationthe claim is not being defended it is assumed to be true.
Truthis a basic concept in logic and philosophy, it is absolute, in the sense that there is no such thing as 'true for me, but not for you.'
Truth of a claimdoes not depend upon whether or not we can figure out whether the claim is ture, or false, or whether we agree whether it's true or false.
Valid argumentif and only if it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. This means the truth of the premises would guarantee the truth of the conclusion.
Invalid argumentif and only if it is possible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. The truth of the premises would not guarantee the truth of the conclusion.

Section 2

Question Answer
Sound argumentA valid argument with true premises.
Fallaciesare missteps in reasoning.
Ad Hominem Fallacy'Refuting' a claim by somehow attacking the person offering it.
'Ad hominem''Against the person'
Genetic Fallacy'Refuting' a claim by attacking the source.This involves showing the claim is somehow 'to be expected' from the source.
Tu quoque'Refuting' a criticism by showing that the criticism is also true of the person offering it.
'Tu quoque''You're another one.'
Begging the Question'Defending' a disputed claim by simply assuming the truth of the disputed claim. (this does not mean raising the question)
Red HerringIs an attempt to distract the interlocutor with an irrelevant claim (to distract)

Section 3

Question Answer
Straw Man'Refuting' a claim by offering a distorted (and silly) version of the claim and refuting it.
Inappropriate Burden of ProofShifting the burden of proof onto the wrong person. (this need more explaining to do, shifting the burden to the opponent)
Verificationist FallacyA non- existent fallacy
Opinionis simply a belief that someone has- and many beliefs are in fact true (and many are false).
Theoryis an attempt to explain a body of data- and some explanations are presumably true.
Mere opinionwhere the issue is simply a matter of taste or personal preference.
Bioethicsis the exploration of ethics in the realm of health medicine, biology and environment.
Normative ethicsthe branch of moral philosophy that seeks to identify moral standards of right and wrong conduct.
Ethical PrinciplesRespect for autonomy, benevolence(to do good), non-maleficence (to do no harm)

Section 4

Question Answer
Utilitarianismit evaluates actions using the single, absolute principle of utility, focusing on human happiness.
Utilitarianism Developed by: John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
The greatest happiness principle"Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness."
Deontology: A theory of Duty Theory that focuses on the nature of actions, holding that something about an action itself makes it right or wrong."Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that which you can at the same time will that it should become a Universal Law."
Deontology developed byImmanuel Kant (1724-1804)
A good willa will determined (motivated) by duty.
Maxima rule, guiding action.
Autonomy at a min."Self-rule that is free from both controlling interference by others & from certain limitations such as an inadequate understanding, that prevents meaningful choice.

Section 5

Question Answer
Principle of respect for autonomy"We recognizable the right of a person to hold views, make choices, and take actions based on 'personal values & beliefs"
CompetenceThe ability to perform a task. Are patients capable, legally or psychologically of adequate decision making?
Surrogatesare required to assess the risks and benefits of options "it is therefore inescapably a quality of life criterion."
Euthanasia"Mercy Killing" intentionally cause death. Kill for mercy. To someone else, killing another.
Physician Assisted SuicideSelf-killing physician prescribe the med, the person goes out take the drug on his/her own terms.
Activeproviding a lethal agent
PassiveRemoving life sustaining case try to accomplish death.
Refusal of treatmentordered to do so, has nothing to do with mercy. Just to follow orders
Doctorine of double-effectActions can have consequences that are foreseen, but not intended.

Section 6

Question Answer
Voluntary euthanasiaexplicit request
Non-voluntary euthanasiaPatients can't request it , and the doctor do it anyways.
Involuntary euthanasiaAgainst patient's will/request and does it anyways, cannot be justified.
Peter SingerHe's a utilitarian, a preference utilitarian, to satisfiy as many preference as we can.