FILO 2127 Dibattiti contemp. Bioetica
Descrizione
Syllabus provvisorio.
The contemporary debate in applied ethics is most heated in the area of bioethical and life issues. These debates are not just theoretical, but have great impact and influence on public policies and laws. It is therefore very beneficial for students to grasp the different ethical theories and their epistemological and anthropological presuppositions, and critically contrast them with the natural law Aristotelian-Thomistic approach of personalist bioethics. By reading the prominent exponents of these different approaches, students are exposed to leading secular authors of bioethics. The areas of contention in bioethics are not only centered on life issues, but also regard views of science and technology, faith and reason, politics and culture.
Metodologia
The course will be conducted primarily in a seminar format. Students are expected to read the assign material before, so as to allow for ample discussion during each class.
ModalitĂ di Verifica
1. Students will need to hand in an assignment of their reading each week of the reading material. (80%) The assignment work should be 2-5 pages long and should consist in:
a. Summary of the argument presented by the author
b. Presentation of their underlying position on anthropology, ethics and epistemology where applicable
c. Their position on personhood, science and technology, relationship between faith and reason, and their understanding of culture and public policies.
d. A critique of their position: internally as regard to their logical coherence, and externally in comparison with the natural law approach.
e. Comparison with other authors on similar topics.
2. The student will be evaluated also by his participation in the discussion. (20%)
Distribuzione
3ETCS = 75 ore di lavoro
• Lezioni - 25 ore
• Letture – 25 ore
• Stesura del lavoro scritto - 25 ore
Learning Outcomes (LO)
1. Summarize the thoughts of contemporary thinkers in ethics.
2. Analyze and categorize the different positions based on their epistemology, anthropology and ethical methodology.
3. Offer a critique of the coherence or incoherence of these positions regarding personhood, medicine and health, science and technology, culture and politics.
4. Compare these authors with the natural law approach and identify the areas of convergence and differences.
Calendario
1. 5-ott Self-study of Bioetica Laica
2. 12-ott Analysis of Bioetica Laica
3. 19-ott McIntyre, Incomensurability
4. 26-ott Murphy, Irreligious Bioethics
5. 2-nov Pellegrino, Philosophy of Med.
6. 9-nov Singer, Infanticide
7. 16-nov Engelhardt, Global Ethics
8. 23-nov Heidegger, Question on Technology
9. 30-nov Guardini, Modernity & technology
10. 7-dic Savulescu, Conscience objection
11. 14-dic Habermas, Eugenics
12. 11-gen Kass, Immortality
13. 18-gen
Ricevimento
Su appuntamento:
[email protected]
Bibliografia
"CARLO FLAMIGNI - A. MASSARENTI - M. MORI - A. PETRONI, “Manifesto di Bioetica Laica”, in Il Sole24Ore (June 9, 1996). http://digilander.libero.it/filosofiaescienza/manifesto_bioeticalaica.htm
ALASDAIR MACINTYRE , “Incommensurability, Truth and the Conversion between Confucians and Aristotelians about the virtues,” in Culture and Modernity: East-West philosophic perspectives, ed. Eliot Deutsch (Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 1991), 104-122.
TIMOTHY MURPHY, “In Defense of Irreligious Bioethics,” in The American Journal of Bioethics, 12.12 (2012), 3-10.
EDMUND D. PELLEGRINO, “Philosophy of Medicine: Problematic and Potential” in ID., Physician and Philosopher: The Philosophical Foundation of Medicine. Carden Jennings Pub. Co., 2001, 37-55.
PETER SINGER - HELGA KUHSE, Should the Baby Live? The Problem of Handicapped Infants, Oxford University Press, 1985.
ENGELHARDT, H. TRISTRAM, ed. Global Bioethics: The Collapse of Consensus. Salem, MA: M & M Scrivener Press, 2006.
MARTIN HEIDEGGER, “The Question Concerning Technology,” in Basic Writings, ed. DAVID KRELL, (New York: HarperCollins, 1993). http://www.psyp.org/question_concerning_technology.pdf
ROMANO GUARDINI, The End of the Modern World, (London: Sheed & Ward, 1957).
JULIAN SAVULESCU - UDO SCHUKLENK. “Doctors Have No Right to Refuse Medical Assistance in Dying, Abortion or Contraception.” in Bioethics 31, no. 3 (March 1, 2017): 162–70.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bioe.12288/full
JĂśRGEN HABERMAS, The Future of Human Nature. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2003, 16-74.
LEON R. KASS, “L’Chaim and Its Limits: Why Not Immortality?” in First Things (New York, N.Y.), no. 113 (May 2001): 17–24. https://www.firstthings.com/article/2001/05/lchaim-and-its-limits-why-not-immortality
"
