Commentary. 2: Thesis correct: argument unconvincing.
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Commentary. 2: Thesis correct: argument unconvincing.
I agree with the proposition set out in Susan Lowe's title: the right to refuse treatment is not a right to be killed. I agree also that the "acts and omissions" distinction is irrelevant to the discussion, while I believe that there are contexts in which the distinction is valid and of moral worth. I believe that the arguments which the author advances to support her proposition to be flawed; ...
متن کاملCommentary An Argument for a Consequentialist Epidemiology
Epidemiology is the study of the causes and distributions of diseases in human populations so that we may identify ways to prevent and control disease. Although this definition broadly serves us well, I suggest that in recent decades, our discipline’s robust interest in identifying causes has come at the expense of a more rigorous engagement with the second part of our vision for ourselves—the ...
متن کاملUnconvincing support for role of mirror neurons in “action understanding”: commentary on Michael et al. (2014)
Mirror neurons, firing when an action is performed but also when the same action is perceived, have been the source of both excitement and controversy since their discovery (Di Pellegrino et al., 1992). One key to this polarization of opinion is the claim that mirror neurons are involved in “action understanding” (Di Pellegrino et al., 1992; Rizzolatti and Sinigaglia, 2010). As we have recently...
متن کاملSecond Commentary on "aristotle's Function Argument"
ABsrRAcr: Cells, tissues, organs, and human beings qua biological organisms have natural functions, but human beings qua moral agents do not. Persons-in-society, unlike organs-in-bodies, are the products of culture as well as nature. Bodily diseases, conventionally defined, are undesirable deviations from objectively identifiable biological norms. Mental diseases, similarly defined, are undesir...
متن کاملKuhn’s Incommensurability Thesis: What’s the Argument? Forthcoming in Social Epistemology
In this paper, I argue that there is neither valid deductive support nor strong inductive support for Kuhn’s incommensurability thesis. There is no valid deductive support for Kuhn’s incommensurability thesis because, from the fact that the reference of the same kind terms changes or discontinues from one theoretical framework to another, it does not necessarily follow that these two theoretica...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Journal of Medical Ethics
سال: 1997
ISSN: 0306-6800
DOI: 10.1136/jme.23.3.160