My position on ethics

[Percivale]

I would describe my ethic as basically utilitarian but with caveats that make it closer to both virtue ethics and deontics. What makes an action right or wrong is whether it increases or decreases the well-being of sentient beings. However, none of us are omniscient, and we don't know what all the results of our actions will be, so we should not do evil that good may come, since we know that that would cause some suffering, but we don't know if greater good would actually result. In a common ethical quandary scenario, we are asked if it would be right to push someone off a bridge so that they would block a train that is about to run over several people. My answer is that in real life we could not know if we would actually succeed in blocking the train, nor if the train may stop for some other reason, nor if the other people will get out of the way. But we do know that action would kill the person pushed off the bridge.
Since I value intangible goods like virtue, and believe in an afterlife, that affects how I calculate the greater good. If a group is rescuing one person, and two of them die in the process, that is still better than them ignoring the person. They have displayed heroism and strengthened people's care for each other, which benefits both this world and their afterlife.

 

[GaveMeJoy]

My uncle is a philosophy professor (Masters SDSU) at San Diego Christian college and he has a whole series on ethics you might think is cool. This is the link to his course discussion on utilitarian ethics

 

[xoxo]

If a group is rescuing one person, and two of them die in the process, that is still better than them ignoring the person. They have displayed heroism and strengthened people's care for each other, which benefits both this world and their afterlife

does it matter who the person is? what kind of life they live? if they are young or old?

 

[xoxo]

what is that person acted foolishly, getting themselves into danger.
would you still save them? and lose your life?

 

[SkyWriting]

I would describe my ethic as basically utilitarian but with caveats that make it closer to both virtue ethics and deontics. What makes an action right or wrong is whether it increases or decreases the well-being of sentient beings. However, none of us are omniscient, and we don't know what all the results of our actions will be, so we should not do evil that good may come, since we know that that would cause some suffering, but we don't know if greater good would actually result. In a common ethical quandary scenario, we are asked if it would be right to push someone off a bridge so that they would block a train that is about to run over several people. My answer is that in real life we could not know if we would actually succeed in blocking the train, nor if the train may stop for some other reason, nor if the other people will get out of the way. But we do know that action would kill the person pushed off the bridge.
Since I value intangible goods like virtue, and believe in an afterlife, that affects how I calculate the greater good. If a group is rescuing one person, and two of them die in the process, that is still better than them ignoring the person. They have displayed heroism and strengthened people's care for each other, which benefits both this world and their afterlife.

A person is not ethically required to save others.
Dilemma solved.

Even doctors vow to "Do No Harm."
Not, stop all harm.

 

[xoxo]

A person is not ethically required to save others.
Dilemma solved.

Even doctors vow to do no harm.
Not, stop all harm.

not at all-required
very nice analogy

 

[xoxo]

A person is not ethically required to save others.
Dilemma solved.

Even doctors vow to "Do No Harm."
Not, stop all harm.

wait a second,
doctors don't make a vow to stop all harm too?

 

[SkyWriting]

wait a second,
doctors don't make a vow to stop all harm too?

Just "Do No Harm".

A person would go mad if they were responsible to stop pain.
We can only address it in the tiny influence we can have.

 

[xoxo]

A person is not ethically required to save others.
Dilemma solved.

Even doctors vow to "Do No Harm."
Not, stop all harm.

really no point of a doctor if they don't vow to attempt to stop all harm?
does sound like today's drs tho

but I agree.

personally, I'm not jeopardizing my life for someone unless they have real value to me or mine is almost over anyway

Just "Do No Harm".

A person would go mad if they were responsible to stop pain.

with today's short staffing and out paced madness, for sure
the need for a doctor is greater than availability of medicine

 

[SkyWriting]

not at all-required
very nice analogy

Oh...it's just a fact.

I can't stop others from dying. I'm very lucky if I'm in a position to help in some tiny way.
Even then, that might be a mistake. I have years of experience prolonging the suffering of loved ones. Helping them live longer was not a joy to me or them.

 

[SkyWriting]

with today's short staffing and out paced madness, for sure the need for a doctor is greater than availability of medicine

A doctor has little advantage over your neighbor.
They just have some additional training.
I have permanent scars on my face because of wrong diagnosis of 4 doctors. The 5th Doctor did not even ask questions. He recognised my actual condition at a glance with no testing needed. Lucky for me I had a health plan that allowed for seeing any doctor in the plan with no referrals needed.

 

[xoxo]

Oh...it's just a fact.

I can't stop others from dying. I'm very lucky if I'm in a position to help in some tiny way.
Even then, that might be a mistake. I have years of experience prolonging the suffering of loved ones. Helping them live longer was not a joy to me or them.

yes i hear you
suffering for an attempt at a good deed

strange ideas about prolonging life in medicine.
truly sad people go thru that
would you have preferred they just died and be left alone?

 

[xoxo]

A doctor has little advantage over your neighbor.
They just have some additional training.

credentials, according to somebody

 

[SkyWriting]

yes i hear you
suffering for an attempt at a good deed
strange ideas about prolonging life in medicine.
truly sad people go thru that
would you have preferred they just died and be left alone?

My Father and Father in Law both had their lives end by doctors intentions.
At the end of life they heavily sedate you and remove the monitoring leads, then "go on rounds" while you die. Some hospitals have volunteers to sit with you so you don't die alone. Often the families don't want to be there.

 

[xoxo]

prayers

their lives end by doctors intentions

can you make this clearer

 

[SkyWriting]

prayers


can you make this clearer

Lethal levels of morphine are given "for the pain" if two doctors agree (predict) you will not live another 3 months. As the morphine kicks in, you slowly stop breathing. That's how old people die in hospitals nowadays. I don't know if that happens in nursing homes.

 

[xoxo]

Lethal levels of morphine are given "for the pain" if two doctors agree (predict) you will not live another 3 months. As the morphine kicks in, you slowly stop breathing.

yes i heard about this during hurricanes/hospital care

how did you prolong their suffering?

I have years of experience prolonging the suffering of loved ones. Helping them live longer was not a joy to me or them

 

[xoxo]

Lucky for me I had a health plan that allowed for seeing any doctor in the plan with no referrals needed

don't even get me started about incompetent doctors
i will have to be unconscious to ever return to a doctor.
they are best at accident operations anyway,
terrible for health

 

[SkyWriting]

yes i heard about this during hurricanes/hospital care
how did you prolong their suffering?

By helping my wife survive day to day, she suffered another 10 years with her heart condition before she died.
Yay for me ~! Yay for her!

 

[SkyWriting]

they are best at accident operations anyway,
terrible for health

Yes. Western health works for trauma, but sucks at most other health issues, especially social trauma that causes poor health. The mind causes the majority of our physical distress. It even creates physical ailments. There is some evidence that the mind causes cancer.