On my part, I believe conscience to be the sense of right and wrong within each person. Basically, if there weren't any, nothing would be morally right or wrong, anyone would just do whatever they wanted. Shooting a person point-blank or mugging a bystander would be regular everyday occurrences in the world. Consciences are what keep wholesome people from doing these acts.
So seeing as it has been established throughout the course of time that the conscience DOES in fact exist (if it didn't the world would probably be in World War [insert random number higher than 2 here], if not already destroyed and wiped clean of existence), it begs the question as to why people still have the nerve to lie, cheat, and steal their way through life. Now, that would either tell us that consciences differ between people (meaning some people get strong ones while others get not-so-strong ones) OR that those people are strong enough to defy their consciences, fueled by whatever force that drives them (e.g. poverty, depravement, etc).
The latter is really not very likely because there are still occurrences of people who are able to hold on to their resolve and strengthen it during times of great trouble. So that leaves us with the first one, that consciences differ among different people. I suppose that there is no such thing as a conscience that views right as wrong and wrong as right, although it would still technically fill the requirements of being a conscience, which is to distinguish between right and wrong (but come on, seriously, is anyone THAT messed up?). So, that leaves us with two potential kinds of conscience. One of them is obviously the good one, the kind that knows what is actually right and definitely wrong, and another that doesn't give a damn about what's right and not.
On a topic such as conscience, it can't be avoided to run into margins of confusion. Simply put, its about morality. Some people would say that lying is an absolute error, or sin if you will, while on the other hand, the other batch of people would actually say that as long as its for a good purpose or if its a tiny little fib, the world won't get launched into oblivion. I mean even if everyone actually follows their conscience, the fact that they aren't uniform means that they are, to an extent, subjective... And would that actually fit as moral?
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
what do you think about ethics and bioethics?
What do I think about ethics and bioethics? That is an interesting question. "Man is gifted with the power of reason and freedom of ac tion. This is what seperates us from the other species in the animal kingdom". Let me answer this question by defining or rather differentiating them inclined with the thought above. Ethics is a branch of philosophy, encircling right conduct and good life. It’s radically broader than the common conception of the analysis of right and wrong. A central aspect of ethics is what is perceived by man to be the good life, it is the life worth living or life that is simply not satisfying, which is held by many philosophers to be more important than moral decisions.
On the other hand, bioethics is the philosophical study of the ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine. The issues tackled are concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, philosophy and theology.
The issues raised by bioethics as a distinct area of academic inquiry are largely answered by the needs of institutions examples are abortion, animal rughts, circumcision, infertility, placebo. Bioethicists today are not hired or engaged in conversation because of their opinions or because they have special skills of reasoning. but because they know and can put to work the enormous body of research and history of discussions about bioethics in a fair, honest and intelligent way, using tools from the different disciplines that improives the field.
As an effect, bioethics has been peculiarly created, by society, specifically the multi-million dollar commitment of major and minor medical centers to the study of medical ethics as part of the development of curriculum and research efforts. Going back to the thought raised earlier, Bioethics and ethics were made as a borderline or measuring stick used for the different controversial issues in our society. It is for us to use the power of reason and choice hand-in- hand with morals, God and values.
On the other hand, bioethics is the philosophical study of the ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine. The issues tackled are concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, philosophy and theology.
The issues raised by bioethics as a distinct area of academic inquiry are largely answered by the needs of institutions examples are abortion, animal rughts, circumcision, infertility, placebo. Bioethicists today are not hired or engaged in conversation because of their opinions or because they have special skills of reasoning. but because they know and can put to work the enormous body of research and history of discussions about bioethics in a fair, honest and intelligent way, using tools from the different disciplines that improives the field.
As an effect, bioethics has been peculiarly created, by society, specifically the multi-million dollar commitment of major and minor medical centers to the study of medical ethics as part of the development of curriculum and research efforts. Going back to the thought raised earlier, Bioethics and ethics were made as a borderline or measuring stick used for the different controversial issues in our society. It is for us to use the power of reason and choice hand-in- hand with morals, God and values.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)