<p>Syftet med denna studie är att synliggöra några lärares uppfattningar kring etik och moral samt hur läraren förmedlar etik och moral till sina elever. Därtill beskrivs några faktorer som dessa lärare uppfattar har betydelse för förmedlingen av etik och moral i skolan.</p><p>Litteraturdelen består av källor från tidigare forskning, teoriböcker i ämnet samt statliga utgåvor kring skolans samhällsuppdrag. </p><p>Den empiriska undersökningen bygger på en kvalitativ studie med utgångspunkt i den fenomenografiska ansatsen. Intervjuer från nio stycken lärare på grundskolans olika stadier har blivit underlag för studiens resultat. </p><p>Studiens resultat visar att lärarens samhällsuppgift som värdegrundsförmedlare är både svår och komplex. Valet av stoff, samt på vilket sätt läraren förmedlar etik och moral, bygger till stor del på hennes egna beslut och erfarenheter. Detta tar sig uttryck i en variation mellan lärarnas uppfattningar kring dessa frågor. Uppdraget har också visat sig vara svårartikulerat, eftersom tolkningen kommer att se olika ut hos olika individer. Värdegrundsuppdraget visar sig därför behöva ett fungerande samtal på skolanoch en gemensam vision av dess mål.</p>

In this essay a social perspective on the mind is explored and argued for. The essay moves from a discussion of a social collective foundation for the individual mind to a discussion ofthe main alternative ways of describing the shared social world, namely an action-centred perspective and a power-centred perspective. It is shown that these two perspectives are combinable. A combination of the two perspectives is therefore recommended for a more balanced way of describing the shared social world. In this essay it is argued for that the individuals’ mind and her identity is dependent on the surrounding community. The identity and habits that the individual acquires is dependent of the individuals’ membership in certain groups within a community and the dominant ways of looking at the world that exist within that community. However, the existing power relations and the dominant ways of looking at the world are in turn dependent on the collective action of individuals for their existence. Relations and customs can be changed and power can be transferred to non-dominant ways of looking at the world. Such change requires collective action to take place.

Denna uppsats utgår från tre texter av Torbjörn Tännsjö och tittar på huruvida kollektiv kan sägas vara ansvariga för handlingar som de utför, samt om det ens finns något sådant som kollektiva handlingar.

Finns det värdefakta? Kan vi ha kunskap i moralfrågor? Finns det över huvud taget rätt och fel i moralfrågor? Med dessa frågor i bakhuvudet vill författaren undersöka ett vanligt argument mot moralisk realism i allmänhet, och Michael Huemers variant av moralisk realism i synnerhet. Detta antirealistiska argument säger att det är så pass vanligt med oenigheter i moralfrågor och att den bästa förklaringen till detta är att moralen är subjektiv. Argumentet säger vidare att etiken lider av bristande konvergens beträffande upplösta etiska oenigheter över tid, jämfört med exempelvis naturvetenskapen. Detta faktum verkar, menar vissa antirealister, ytterligare tala emot att det existerar värdefakta. Med detta som utgångspunkt tar uppsatsförfattaren reda på varför argumentet misslyckas med att skada Michael Huemers moraliska realism.

<p>International regulations target a global reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions through the allocation of national reduction targets and the definition of mechanisms to achieve these targets. One of these mechanisms is international emissions trading, these trading programs have been the targets of widespread criticism since they were introduced into the policy-making arena. The point of departure in this study has been that the trading raises questions about morality, since it implies signals, which legitimates pollution. The main purpose with this study has been to find out if emissions trading systems can be morally justified with the method of wide reflective equilibrium. From the study it was found that the moral intuition; it is wrong to pollute the environment, and perform activities, which legitimates pollution, finds support from the different theories within environmental ethics and Kantian ethics. But, it was also found that there are a number of background theories, such as neo-classical economic thinking, liberalism, and utilitarianism, that supports the notion of emissions trading. The paper argues that even though the concept of CO2-emissions trading raises moral questions it can be morally defended on the basis of rationality. When the theory about specification is applied to the concept of emissions trading it is possible to reach a situation were a wide reflective equilibrium is achieved.</p>

<p>As we approach the 21st Century, our society is increasingly being faced with technological advances. One of such areas of advancement is the reasearch involving human genes. The human genome-mapping project(HGMP) started on the first of october 1990 with a group of over 350 labs. but by late 90's, many important advances had been discovered concerning how to improve the human specie. With these advances came ethical questions and concerns.Both moral and legal questions have been raised as to the effectiveness and safty of this technology. It is the contention of this paper to give a clearer meaning and understanding of the ethics of genetic control.As such I will discuss the wide spread fears and anxiety brought about by the introduction of this new technology. To make this aim more comprehensible, I will pay particular attention to Joseph Fletcher and his books on Genetic control, and Humanhood: Essays In Biomedical Ethics. Fletchers ardent support for genetic control has developed worldwide debates from both ethicists and philosophers as to the safty and efficiency of genetic engineering.</p>

<p>The intimate connection between autonomy and decision-making in applied health care, especially in various kinds of consent and refusal has taken center stage in medical ethics since the Salgo decision in 1957. Prior to that time, the physician’s supposedly moral duty to provide appropriate medical care typically surpassed the legal obligation to respect patient’s autonomy. The Salgo decision concluded that physicians have a legal duty to provide facts necessary for the patient to make an informed decision. "The doctor knows best" long ago was replaced with "The doctor proposes; the patient disposes." There is no legal obligation for the patient’s choice to be palatable to anyone, other than that patient himself/herself. Although Beauchamp and Childress justified the obligation to solicit decisions from patients and potential research subjects by the principle of respect for autonomy, they however, acknowledged that the principle’s precise demands remain unsettled and open to interpretations and specification. This thesis addresses a current debate in the bioethical community on the four-principle approach. Using Tom Beauchamp and James Childress as case study, to discuss mainly the principle of respect for autonomy, I go on to explain their central arguments concerning this principle in relation to decision making in health care ethics. Rather than focus on their respective weaknesses, which many theorist and health care professionals do, I emphasis instead on the contribution the principle of respect for autonomy can make in the process of ethical decision making in health care situation.</p>

<p>There is no stronger or more enduring prohibition in medicine than the rule against the killing of patients by doctors. This prohibition is rooted in some medical codes and principles. Out standing among the principles surrounding these prohibitions are the principles of beneficence and non-maleficience. The contents of these principles in a way mark the professional integrity of the physician. But the modern approach to health care services pulls a demand for the respect of the individual right of self-determination. This demand is now glaring in almost all the practices pertaining to health care services. In end of life decisions, this modern demand is found much in practices like physician- assisted suicide and euthanasia. It demands that the physician ought to respect the wish and choice of the patient, and so, must assist the patient in bringing about his or her death when requested. In such manner, this views the principle of autonomy as absolute and should not be overridden in any circumstance.</p><p>However, the physician on his part is part of the medical profession that has integrity to protect. This integrity in medical profession which demands that the physician works only towards the health care of the patient and to what reduces diseases and deaths often go contrary to this respect for individual autonomy. Thus faced with such requests by patients, the physician always sees his integrity in conflict with his demand to respect the autonomous choice of the patient and so has a dilemma in responding to such requests. This is the focus of this work,"Professional Integrity and the Dilemma in Physician- Assisted Suicide"</p><p>However, the centre of my argument in this work is not merely though necessary to develop general arguments for or against the general justification of PAS, but to critically view the role played by the physicians in assisting the death of their patients as it comes in conflict with the medical obligation and integrity. Is it morally right, out rightly wrong or in certain situation permissible that physicians respond positively to the request of the patients for PAS? This is the overarching moral problem in the morality of physician- assisted suicide, and this work will consider this in line with the main problem in the work “the dilemma of professional physicians in the assistance of suicide.</p>

<p>The purpose of this paper is to understand why education is a human right. I will look at works by the late Paulo Freire, a Brazilian educator. Paulo Freire worked for many years on developing a pedagogy to promote humanity. His goal was to demonstrate that a literate person will ultimately live a better life because she will be free from oppression and domination.</p><p>I chose to study Paulo Freire as a tool in proving why education is a human right because throughout his work he demonstrated the need for people to be literate in order for them to be considered “truly human”. I will address this term further in my argument.</p><p>This thesis is a work in progress. My goal is to include chapters illustrating Amartya Sen’s theory and ideology, and compare them to those of Freire’s. I would also like to include a chapter specifically dedicated to women and education, since it is common practice for women in many countries to sacrifice their right to education so the males in their families can attend school.</p>

<p>The health care formulation of the principle of autonomy can be expressed as follows; ‘you shall not treat a patient without the informed consent of the patient, or his or her lawfulsurrogate, except in narrowly defined emergencies’. The principle of beneficence refers to a moral obligation to act for the benefit of others. In heath care, the good or benefit in question is the restoration of the health of the patient. In fulfilling this obligation of beneficence, the physician sometimes intentionally overrides the patient’s preferences or actions for the purpose of benefiting the patient. This is called paternalism. It therefore amounts to a violation of the principle of autonomy and hence there arises a tension or conflict between autonomy and beneficence.</p><p>The principle of autonomy claims to be pre-eminent to the principle of beneficence and vice versa. Both have their arguments as well as their limitations. However, there is the need for at least weak paternalism for the mentally ill patients because of their diminished autonomy. But in the case of the temporarily mentally ill patient whose autonomy is both restored and diminished following the periodic and intermittent occurrence of his or her mental illness, there is a need to go deeper to find justification for paternalistic intervention.</p><p>Both act and rule utilitarianism will find justification for paternalism in this case because the consequence of the action will be greater good for both the patient and the society. Kantianism will give it support from the point of view that the intention is to restore the autonomy of the patient by not using him or her as a means but as and end in himself or herself. Beauchamp and Childress will equally throw their weight behind the justification since prima facie obligations could be overridden in a conflict situation and since restricting a short term autonomy to protect and advance long term autonomy will appeal to common morality.</p>