An empirical study of how Malaysian pluralism is understood through Islam Hadhari, Article 11 and the Inter-faith Commission against the backdrop of current Malaysian political and social history, coupled with a theoretical analysis through John Rawls' Political Liberalism, with particular emphasis on the idea of Overlapping Consensus. The thesis is an attempt at applying Rawls' theory on the practical case of Malaysia, as a plural society, while at the same time using the practical case of Malaysia to highlight parts of Rawls' own theory.

This essay describes the philosophy of science that Thomas Kuhn puts forth in his work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The question is, does his description of the scientific paradigm work as well today as in the examples he gave in the book? The conclusion is that there are certain factors that make for a number of differences between science today and, for example in the seventeenth century. There is also a growing theory or vision of a post normal science laid developed by among others Jerome Ravetz. This theory or vision is an idea of a science close to peer-communities and fast as well as critical decisions involving opposite values.

The overall aim of this thesis is to show how some ideas in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics can be interpreted and used as a productive way to approach a number of pressing issues in bioethics. Articles I-II introduce, and endorse, a social constructivist perspective on rights (as opposed to the more traditional natural rights idea). It is investigated if the existence of property-like rights to biological material would include the moral right to commodification and even commercialisation. Articles III-V discuss similar questions and more specifically champion the application of an Aristotelian virtue ethics perspective. The articles are preceded by an introductory essay on some of the central themes in the Nicomachean Ethics. This section also includes a very brief account of what the connection between virtue ethics and a theory of social construction, including rights, could look like. The thesis seeks to show that if read somewhat creatively many of the ideas in the Nicomachean Ethics make for a highly useful approach to modern moral problems. It should be noted, however, that this thesis in no way claims to be an exegetic, or a complete, study of the Nicomachean Ethics. Article I deals with ownership of biological material from a philosophical, as opposed to a legal, perspective. It is argued that a strand in liberal political theory that treats property relations as socially constructed bundles of rights, as developed by e.g. Felix Cohen and Tony Honoré, is well suited for discussions on ownership of biological material. Article II investigates which differences in biological material might motivate differences in treatment and ownership rights. The article draws on the social constructivist theory of ownership which was developed in Article I. Article III employs virtue ethics to explain why it is morally permissible to donate but not to sell organs such as kidneys. It is suggested that the former action will bring the agent closer to a state of human flourishing. Article IV argues that virtues like philia, justice, beneficence and generosity — traditionally all seen as other-regarding — contain strong self-regarding aspects. The central claim is that these self-regarding aspects of the other-regarding virtues are necessary components of complete virtue and thus that the fully virtuous agent has to act virtuously both in her dealings with herself and others. Article V applies the ideas that were developed in Article IV to the case of living organ donations to next of kin. It is proposed that such an act, although noble and fine, is supererogatory, rather than obligatory, as the donor is morally entitled to be partial to herself. This argument is made against the backdrop of a discussion on some Aristotelian ideas on philia and partiality. / QC 20100709

This thesis investigates what work ought to be like. The answer it presents consists of an outline of a liberaltheory of justice in the employment contract based on theory developed in the area of political philosophy. Thethesis also examines issues of efficiency—How should measures to improve working conditions be evaluated?—and the ethical implications of the economic theory of employment contracts and the neoclassical theory of themarket. Paper I: A theoretical framework is introduced for the evaluation of workplace inspections with respect totheir effects on working conditions. The choice of a concept of efficiency is discussed, and its relation to criteriafor a good working environment is clarified. It is concluded that in order to obtain reliable information onthe effects of different inspection methods, it is necessary to perform controlled comparative studies in whichdifferent methods are used on different workplaces. Paper II: This article outlines the structure of a Rawlsian theory of justice in the employment relationship.The theory answers three questions about justice and the workplace. What is the relationship between socialjustice and justice at work? How should we conceive of the problem of justice within the economic sphere?And, what is justice in the workplace? Reasons for a specific construction of a local original position are givenand arguments are presented in support of a principle of local justice in the form of a choice egalitarian localdifference principle. Paper III: The political philosophy of John Rawls is applied to the moral dilemma of whistleblowing, andit is shown that that the requirement of loyalty, in the sense that is needed to create this dilemma, is inconsistentwith that theory. In a discussion and rejection of Richard De George’s criteria on permissible whistleblowing,it is pointed out that the mere rejection of loyalty will not lead to an extreme position; harms can still be takeninto account. Paper IV: The case is made that if contemporary economics of the employment contract is correct, thenin order to explain the existence of employment contracts, we must make the assumption that the contractingparties are attempting to deal with decisiontheoreticignorance. It follows that the course of action that theemployer chooses to take when acting from authority cannot be justified by consent, since the informednesscriterion of consent cannot be satisfied under ignorance. It is then suggested that in order to achieve justificationof acts of authority, there must be in place a real possibility to contest employers’ decisions. Paper V: According to Ronald Dworkin’s theory of equality of resources, mimicking the ideal market fromequal starting points is fair. According to Dworkin, the ideal market should be understood as described in GérardDebreu’s influential work, which implies that we should conceive of trade as taking place under certainty. Thereare no choices under risk in such a market. Therefore, there is no such thing as option luck in the ideal market.Consequently, when mimicking this market, we cannot hold people responsible for option luck. Mimicking thismarket also implies that we ought to set up a social safety net, since rational individuals with perfect foresightwould see to it that they always have sufficient resources at each point in life. Furthermore, the idea of insuranceis incompatible with the ideal market. / QC 20100728

The thesis aims at analyzing the concepts of risk and safety as well as the class of concepts to which they belong, thick concepts, focusing in particular on the normative aspects involved. Essay I analyzes thick concepts, i.e. concepts such as cruelty and kindness that seem to combine descriptive and evaluative features. The traditional account, in which thick concepts are analyzed as the conjunction of a factual description and an evaluation, is criticized. Instead, it is argued that the descriptive and evaluative aspects must be understood as a whole. Furthermore, it is argued that the two main worries evoked against non-naturalism – that non-naturalism cannot account for disagreement and that it is not genuinely explanatory – can be met. Essay II investigates the utilization of the Kripke/Putnam causal theory of reference in relation to the Open Question Argument. It is argued that the Open Question Argument suitably interpreted provides prima facie evidence against the claim that moral kinds are natural kinds, and that the causal theory, as interpreted by leading naturalist defenders, actually underscores this conclusion. Essay III utilizes the interpretation of the Open Question Argument argued for in the previous essay in order to argue against naturalistic reduction of risk, i.e. reduction of risk into natural concepts such as probability and harm. Three different normative aspects of risk and safety are put forward – epistemic uncertainty, distributive normativity and border normativity – and it is argued that these normative aspects cannot be reduced to a natural measure. Essay IV provides a conceptual analysis of safety in the context of societal decision-making, and argues for a notion that explicitly includes epistemic uncertainty, the degree to which we are uncertain of our knowledge of the situation at hand. Some formal versions of a comparative safety concept are also proposed. Essay V puts forward a normative critique against a common argument, viz. the claim that the public should follow the experts’ advice in recommending an activity whenever the experts have the best knowledge of the risk involved. The importance of safety in risk acceptance together with considerations from epistemic uncertainty makes the claim incorrect even after including plausible limitations to exclude ‘external’ considerations. Furthermore, it is shown that the scope of the objection covers risk assessment as well as risk management. Essay VI provides a systematized account of safety engineering practices that clarifies their relation to the goal of safety engineering, namely to increase safety. A list of 24 principles referred to in the literature of safety engineering is provided, divided into four major categories. It is argued that important aspects of these methods can be better understood with the help of the distinction between risk and uncertainty, in addition to the common distinction between risk and probability. / QC 20100803

We now live in an era of experts on virtually everything, among which we have professional medical ethicists, who gained prominence in the late 60s due to dramatic advances in medical technology. Before then, medical ethics issues were not thought as separable from the warp and woof of the everyday life. Medical technology’s advancement cascades legions of moral problems in medicine and biomedical research. Series of innovative interventions in medicine raise throngs of ethical questions. In most cases that have to do with issues of life and death, there are perceived moral conflicts. Due to this swath of problematic issues that need solutions, some apologists favour medical ethics experts as fit for the job, while critics argue that no one has the knowledge or skill for dealing with moral quandaries because objective truth is not feasible in ethics and moral judgment is relative to cultures, beliefs and values. The necessity for medical ethicists to take active role in Medical Ethics Debates, either in Committees at the institutional level, or at any other decision-making mechanisms is justified in this thesis. In addition to this, the thesis also justifies medical ethicists’ role as expert consultants to clinicians and individuals alike This justification is based on complex moral problems accentuated by medical technology, which are far from being easily solved through mere appeal to individual reason, but rather by involving medical ethicists based on their specialized knowledge and high level understanding of research and practice. Although critics question the authority with which experts speak on these issues, nevertheless, the thesis unravels the roles, functions, significance and components of expert’s expertise that separate him/her from the crowd. Arguments are critically analysed and medical ethicists’ limits and professional flaws are addressed, with a view to establishing a virile foundation for the profession of medical ethics.

No description available.

The object of this thesis is the foundation of ethics. The question is whether there exists a universal core to ethics consisting of a fundamental ethical principle across cultures. This principle could for example be the so-called Golden Rule, which goes as follows: ‘You should do to others what you want them to do to you’. The Golden Rule is to be found in many of the world’s religions and is also reflected in secular society. The rule can for example be found in a political version in legal declarations e.g. the Humans Rights Declaration of 1948. There are philosophersand scientists who interpret the Golden Rule secularly. If one looks at the Golden Rule from a non-religious point of view, it can be understood for instance in the following ways: 1) As a rule which is followed to fulfil self-interest and 2) As a rule concerning role reversal. In this thesis we will go into detail on these two interpretations of the Golden Rule, because as we will see, they can be seen as two very different views of human nature. We will discuss which of the two interpretations of the Golden Rule is most adequate in connection with the description of human beings as moral agents having reason, motives, freedom and responsibility. Furthermore we will focus on the Golden Rule in a Nordic context, in this connection we will look at whether the Golden Rule corresponds to the four bioethical principles presented by the two American philosophers Tom L. Beauchamp and James F. Childress. These principles are the principle of respect for autonomy, the principle of nonmaleficence, the principle of beneficence and the principle of justice. According to the Danish physician Henrik R. Wulff one cannot use Beauchamp and Childress’ bioethical principles as a tool for solving ethical problems in the North, because they do not correspond to the Golden Rule. Wulff argues that the Golden Rule is a moral ideal within the health services in the Nordic countries. The purpose of the thesis is, among others, to analyse and discuss whether the four bioethical principles are implicitly contained within the Golden Rule and whether Beauchamp and Childress’ method can be used to analyse bioethical problems in a Nordic context. Finally, we will set forth an ethical assessment of a treatment within biomedicine. As an example of the application of the four bioethical principles, we will look at whether human somatic gene therapy is an ethical acceptable treatment. Thus my thesis is that the Golden Rule can be viewed as a fundamental ethical principle across cultures and that Beauchamp and Childress’ four bioethical principles correspond to the Golden Rule. That is, I think there is a reason to maintain, that the bioethical principles can be of use for solving bioethical problems across cultures.

In this thesis the scope and limits of reprogenetic choices - refering to reproductive applications of genetics made in the medical context - is adressed. Through posing four analytical questions concerning who should cecide about what in reprogenetics an analysis of possible answers is made. The method consists of an analysis of texts of ethicists Robertson, Strong, Davis, Murray, Peters and Buchanan et al, chosen to reflect a diversity concerning the scope of reproductive autonomy and what values that need to be taken into consideration. The most justified position found, concerning a possible policy of reprogenetic choices, is that there are several good reasons for leaving the reprogenetic choices with the parents, foremost since reproduction indeed is central to individuals identity, dignity and meaning of life. There are also good reasons to avoid governmental steering. This for instance since steering risks promoting perfectibilism, which would threaten human dignity. But also the reprogenetic choices cannot be left unrestricted. It is then argued that restrictions of parental reproductive autonomy should serve to protect the childs right to an open future, and that choices that reflect a search for perfectibilism should be cautioned. Autonomous reprogenetic choices should mean qualified choices - where relevant information is given and also an opportunity to make more than one choice is fostered.

An application of biotechnology that has been rapidly matured under the last ten years is genetically modified food. The deliberative release of GMO faces the challenge of complying with sustainable development and implies a precautionary approach to all possible risk involved. This study purpose is to investigate the problems of risks concerning deliberative release of GMO and to define the question of responsibility. These two themes, risk and responsibility, are discussed in relation to society, citizens, corporations andscience. A more profound understanding of the relation between risk and responsibility in the GMO context could contribute to the sensitivity and deliberation in bio-politics, so it better can cope with democratic governance, public debate and risk deliberations. Politicians and other decisions-makers have a responsibility to assure that they have sufficient knowledge and understanding for the issue at hand before taking any decision. A responsible bio-politics departs from the precautionary principle in decisions making, gaining knowledge in dialogue with concerned GMO actors and tries to correspond to sustainable development. Hence, knowledge and understanding is needed which are reached in dialogue with other parties in order to allowed values, attitudes and knowledge to be deliberate more extensively.