Perfect duties in the face of human imperfection: A critical examination of Kant\u27s ethic of suicide (Immanuel Kant).

The purpose of this work is to offer a critical examination of Immanuel Kant\u27s ethic of suicide. Kant\u27s suicidology marks an influential view regarding the moral stature of suicide, yet one that remains incomplete in important respects. Because Kant\u27s moral views are rationalistic, they restrict moral consideration to rational entities. Many people who commit suicide are not rational at the time of its commission, for they suffer from severe mental illness. Because of this, Kant\u27s suicidology devastatingly excludes certain human demographics from moral consideration, current Canadian statistics indicating that such people mark one of the highest populations at risk of committing suicide in the first place. This work contains a presentation, analysis, and critique of Kant\u27s ethic of suicide, leading to an attempt to state criteria for an adequate suicidology.Dept. of Philosophy. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2006 .T66. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-01, page: 0101. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2006

A Comparative Defense of Self-initiated Prospective Moral Answerability for Autonomous Robot harm

As artificial intelligence becomes more sophisticated and robots approach autonomous decision-making, debates about how to assign moral responsibility have gained importance, urgency, and sophistication. Answering Stenseke’s (2022a) call for scaffolds that can help us classify views and commitments, we think the current debate space can be represented hierarchically, as answers to key questions. We use the resulting taxonomy of five stances to differentiate—and defend—what is known as the “blank check” proposal. According to this proposal, a person activating a robot could willingly make themselves answerable for whatever events ensue, even if those events stem from the robot’s autonomous decision(s). This blank check solution was originally proposed in the context of automated warfare (Champagne & Tonkens, 2015), but we extend it to cover all robots. We argue that, because moral answerability in the blank check is accepted voluntarily and before bad outcomes are known, it proves superior to alternative ways of assigning blame. We end by highlighting how, in addition to being just, this self-initiated and prospective moral answerability for robot harm provides deterrence that the four other stances cannot match

Settling for second best: when should doctors agree to parental demands for suboptimal medical treatment?

Background Doctors sometimes encounter parents who object to prescribed treatment for their children, and request suboptimal substitutes be administered instead (suboptimal being defined as less effective and/or more expensive). Previous studies have focused on parental refusal of treatment and when this should be permitted, but the ethics of requests for suboptimal treatment has not been explored. Methods The paper consists of two parts: an empirical analysis and an ethical analysis. We performed an online survey with a sample of the general public to assess respondents’ thresholds for acceptable harm and expense resulting from parental choice, and the role that religion played in their judgement. We also identified and applied existing ethical frameworks to the case described in the survey to compare theoretical and empirical results. Results Two hundred and forty-two Mechanical Turk workers took our survey and there were 178 valid responses (73.6%). Respondents’ agreement to provide treatment decreased as the risk or cost of the requested substitute increased (p<0.001). More than 50% of participants were prepared to provide treatment that would involve a small absolute increased risk of death for the child (<5%) and a cost increase of US$<500, respectively. Religiously motivated requests were significantly more likely to be allowed (p<0.001). Existing ethical frameworks largely yielded ambiguous results for the case. There were clear inconsistencies between the theoretical and empirical results. Conclusion Drawing on both survey results and ethical analysis, we propose a potential model and thresholds for deciding about the permissibility of suboptimal treatment requests

Why play an active role? A qualitative examination of lay citizens’ main motives for participation in health promotion

While active participation is regarded essential in health promotion worldwide, its application proves to be challenging. Notably, participants' experiences are infrequently studied, and it is largely unknown why lay citizens would want to play an active role in promoting the health of the community they belong to. Aiming to produce practical insights to further the application of the participation principle, this qualitative study examined participants' driving motives in a diverse array of health promotion undertakings. Six projects in The Netherlands were used as case studies, including a community-project promoting mental health, peer education against harmful substance use, a health support group, health policy development, physical activity and healthy life style courses. The study involved 24 participants, who played a variety of active roles. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim and subjected to content analysis. We found four main motives driving lay citizens in their active participation in health promotion projects: ‘purposeful action’, ‘personal development’, ‘exemplary status’ and ‘service and reciprocity’. The motives reflected crucially distinct personal desires in the participation process, namely to produce tangible results, to experience advancements for oneself, to gain personal recognition as a role model and to have or maintain valued relationships. The implications of the findings are discussed for researchers and professionals in health promotion