Mokslinio darbo objektas - bioetikos teorijos, paremtos deontologija ir utilitarizmu. Darbo tikslas – įvertinti bioetikos teorijose siūlomų etinių principų normatyvinį pagrįstumą. Moksliniame darbe yra atlikta lyginamoji bioetikos teorijų analizė, išanalizuotas teorinių bioetikos koncepcijų prielaidų pagrįstumas. Yra teigiama, kad analizuojamas bioetikos teorijas galima skirstyti pagal jų konstravimo podūdį į homogeniškas ir heterogeniškas. Homogeniškos teorijos tesia konkrečią etinę tradiciją (deontologijos ar utilitarizmo) ir siūlo spręsti bioetines kontroversijas, tokias kaip abortai, eunazija, pagelbstimoji savižudybė taikant konkrečias vertybines nuostatas, būdingas astovaujamai šakai. Heterogeniškos teorijos bando derinti deontologiją su utilitarizmu vienoje koncepcijoje, siekdamos pasiūlyti bioetinių kontroversijų sprendimo būdus priimtinus pliuralistinėje visuomenėje. Disertacijoje teigiama, kad deontologija ir utilitarizmu pagrįstos bioetinės teorijos nepasiūlo aiškių ir priimtinų principų, reikalingų sprendžiant bioetines kontroversijas. / The object of dissertation is bioethical theories based on deontology and utilitarianism. The purpose of dissertation is to examine if ethical principles proposed in bioethical theories are normatively justified. In this work comparative analysis of bioethical theories is made and theoretical assumptions of bioethical conceptions are analyzed. It is stated that according to the construction manner of the analyzed bioethical theories it is possible to group these theories to homogenic and heterogenic ones. Homogenic theories are proceeding along particular ethical tradition (deontological or utilitarian) and propose to deal with bioethical controversies such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide applying particular value-system. Heterogenic theories are trying to combine deontology with utilitarianism in one conception and in this way to propose method suitable for pluralistic society for dealing with bioethical controversies. In this work it is stated that bioethical theories based on deontology and utilitarianism do not introduce any clear and acceptable principles and methods needed for solving bioethical issues.

The object of dissertation is bioethical theories based on deontology and utilitarianism. The purpose of dissertation is to examine if ethical principles proposed in bioethical theories are normatively justified. In this work comparative analysis of bioethical theories is made and theoretical assumptions of bioethical conceptions are analyzed. It is stated that according to the construction manner of the analyzed bioethical theories it is possible to group these theories to homogenic and heterogenic ones. Homogenic theories are proceeding along particular ethical tradition (deontological or utilitarian) and propose to deal with bioethical controversies such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide applying particular value-system. Heterogenic theories are trying to combine deontology with utilitarianism in one conception and in this way to propose method suitable for pluralistic society for dealing with bioethical controversies. In this work it is stated that bioethical theories based on deontology and utilitarianism do not introduce any clear and acceptable principles and methods needed for solving bioethical issues. / Mokslinio darbo objektas - bioetikos teorijos, paremtos deontologija ir utilitarizmu. Darbo tikslas – įvertinti bioetikos teorijose siūlomų etinių principų normatyvinį pagrįstumą. Moksliniame darbe yra atlikta lyginamoji bioetikos teorijų analizė, išanalizuotas teorinių bioetikos koncepcijų prielaidų pagrįstumas. Yra teigiama, kad analizuojamas bioetikos teorijas galima skirstyti pagal jų konstravimo podūdį į homogeniškas ir heterogeniškas. Homogeniškos teorijos tesia konkrečią etinę tradiciją (deontologijos ar utilitarizmo) ir siūlo spręsti bioetines kontroversijas, tokias kaip abortai, eunazija, pagelbstimoji savižudybė taikant konkrečias vertybines nuostatas, būdingas astovaujamai šakai. Heterogeniškos teorijos bando derinti deontologiją su utilitarizmu vienoje koncepcijoje, siekdamos pasiūlyti bioetinių kontroversijų sprendimo būdus priimtinus pliuralistinėje visuomenėje. Disertacijoje teigiama, kad deontologija ir utilitarizmu pagrįstos bioetinės teorijos nepasiūlo aiškių ir priimtinų principų, reikalingų sprendžiant bioetines kontroversijas.

Classical utilitarianism faces significant problems: it ignores moral rights; it cannot take account of all free rational agents; and its focus on happiness means that it dismisses the other things that people value for their own sake. These problems lead to conflicts with autonomy, personal integrity and inconsistencies with the way in which utilitarianism justifies the value of happiness. This thesis seeks to solve these problems by introducing the protection of freedom as a new measure of utility.

My aim in this essay is wholly constructive: it is to present the lines along which a satisfactory utilitarianism may be developed. Such a theory is satisfactory in respect of its being able to over, come or evade objections to previous utilitarianisms, specifically, to previous act_utilitarianisms; I have picked several of these objections to form the rock upon which the strength of a utilitarian is to be tested. The objections in question all center around the question of whether, given his consequential account of rightness, an act_utilitarian can support the useful social rules and institutions of our society; or whether his position, because of its consequential account of rightness, commits him to acting in such a way as to undermine these rules and institutions. I shall argue that a new form of act_utilitarianism, which I call tempered act_utilitarianism, can both retain its consequential account of rightness and yet can (a) accommodate these rules and institutions within it, (b) allow its proponents on act_utilitarian grounds to advocate adherence to them, as providing us with the beet chance of doing the right or optimific thing, (c) cater to the views of the 'plain man' in this important respect, and (d) achieve all this without recourse to rule_utilitarianism.

Thesis (doctoral)--Göteborgs universitet, 2004. / Leaf with title, thesis statement, and abstract in English inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 145-148).

Thesis (Ph. L.)--Catholic University of America, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 64-66).

Thesis (Ph. L.)--Catholic University of America, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 64-66).

Thesis (Ph. L.)--Catholic University of America, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 64-66).

Thesis (doctoral)--Göteborgs universitet, 2004. / Leaf with title, thesis statement, and abstract in English inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 145-148).

Thesis (doctoral)--Göteborgs universitet, 2004. / Leaf with title, thesis statement, and abstract in English inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 145-148).