Thursday, February 25, 2016
Medicine and Society
12:00-1:00PM Dominic Wilkinson, Cost Equivalence: Pluralist Allocation of Resources in a Public Health System
Powerpoint presentation
– Lunch provided
There is more than one way to determine the effectiveness of a treatment and patients sometimes reasonably prefer treatment options that appear less effective. Even when they employ cost-effectiveness thresholds, public health systems should find ways to accommodate such preferences.
1:10-1:40PM Discussion
1:40-2:00PM BREAK
2:00-2:40PM Brian Earp, Earp Medicalization of Love
2:40-2:50PM Comment: Lauren Bunch
The use of “love drugs” and “anti-love drugs” is sometimes justified, and even desirable. Contrary to what some critics suggest, scientists should pursue research into these drugs. However, they also need clear ethical guidance, including an understanding of the implications of using these drugs for society at large.
2:50-3:30PM Discussion
3:30-4:00PM BREAK
4:00-4:40PM Hannah Maslen, The Ethics of Deep Brain Stimulation for Chronic Pain
4:40-4:50PM Comment: Jennifer Hawkins
Deep Brain Stimulation of the anterior cingulate cortex is showing potential as a treatment for chronic pain. Both the primary and side effects raise pressing ethical questions. Stimulation does not alleviate the pain per se; rather, the patient ceases to find the pain aversive. This raises theoretical and practical questions regarding the patient’s wellbeing. Patients also display increased apathy towards other people’s suffering, with potential interpersonal implications. Finally, the high risk of dangerous seizures engendered by the intervention prompts refection on appropriate limits to patient decision-making.
4:50-5:30PM Discussion
Friday, February 26, 2016
Value and Individuals
12:00-1:00PM Julian Savulescu, Disability or Difference?
Powerpoint presentation
– Lunch provided
Intuitively, it is impermissible to cause disabilities. This verdict grounds an objection to the views of some disability activists, who argue that disability is merely a difference. Recently, some philosophers have tried to rescue the activists from this objection. But the objection remains in force.
1:10-1:40PM Discussion
1:40-2:00PM BREAK
2:00-2:40PM Carissa Véliz, “Sunlight is Said to Be the Best of Disinfectants”: Privacy versus Radical Transparency
2:40-2:50PM Comment: Gopal Sreenivasan
How attractive is the ideal of a fully transparent society? On an optimistic picture, radical transparency has some clear virtues. However, individual privacy is also an important value and it would be more difficult to protect under conditions of radical transparency. On balance, privacy should prevail.
2:50-3:30PM Discussion
3:30-4:00PM BREAK
4:00-4:40PM Joshua Shepherd, The Moral Insignificance of Self-Consciousness
4:40-4:50PM Comment: Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
Self-consciousness appears highly morally significant. For example, it seems to provide strong moral reasons not to kill or harm entities that possess it. However appearances are misleading. Arguments to defend these intuitive implications of self-consciousness do not withstand scrutiny.
4:50-5:30PM Discussion
