Syllabus

	Project IMHOTEP Summer 2009

BIOETHICS / VALUES IN SCIENCE

Syllabus

Available at http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/Imhotep.htm

Or, with graphics, at http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/Imhotep.pdf

COURSE INFORMATION	INSTRUCTOR, CONTACT INFO., OFFICE HOURS
Day-Date Contact Hours Time Location Wednesday, May 27, 2009 1 8:00 a.m.-8:50 a.m. Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II Thursday, May 28, 2009 1 8:00 a.m.-8:50 a.m. Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II Monday, June 8, 2009 1 11:00 a.m.-11:50 a.m. Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II Tuesday,June 9, 2009 1 11:00 a.m.-11:50 a.m. Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II	Nathan Nobis, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Philosophy, Morehouse College Adjunct Assistant Professor, Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Morehouse School of Medicine NathanNobis.com nathan.nobis@gmail.com TELEPHONE: 404-825-1740 cell Office Hours: TBA

Course Description:

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience,

but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”
- Martin Luther King Jr., Morehouse College, ‘48

This mini-course introduces students to the methods and results of philosophical bioethics. Our topics will include an overview of logical argument analysis and moral theories (hypotheses or explanations for what makes right actions right and what makes wrong actions wrong); human and animal experimentation; global bioethics, poverty and resource allocation; and a final topic (or topics) of students’ choice, e.g., abortion, stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia or some other issues(s). We will focus on developing students’ logical skills in identifying and evaluating moral arguments in bioethics. This involves finding clear and precise conclusions on moral issues, clear and precise reasons or premises given in their favor and assessing whether these premises provide adequate support or evidence for these conclusions. This skills-based approach will help provide students with the intellectual and moral tools needed to begin more effectively addressing further bioethical issues and for further learning and research on the issues discussed in class.

Course Objectives:

Upon successful completion of this course, students will:

· Understand basic concepts of logic and moral argument analysis (premise, conclusion, logically valid arguments, sound arguments; clarity, precision).

· Understand basic moral theories (hypotheses or explanations for what makes right actions right and what makes wrong actions wrong), how one might develop a moral theory (e.g., by inference to the best explanation from clear, confident cases) and how one might critique a moral theory or moral principle, i.e., argue that it is false (e.g., by the method of counterexample).

· Understand the most important and most-discussed positions or conclusions on the bioethical issues discussed in the readings and in discussion, the arguments given in favor of these conclusions, the critical responses to these arguments, and be able to evaluate these arguments and provide reasons in favor of one’s views and reasoned responses to those who disagree.

Required Text:

Bernard Rollin, Science and Ethics (Cambridge University Press, 2006)

http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521674188

§ AVAILABLE USED at Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/Science-Ethics-Bernard-E-Rollin/dp/0521674182

§ AVAILABLE USED at Abebooks.com: http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=rollin&sts=t&tn=science+and+ethics&x=33&y=16

· Other required readings available in a packet, online for download and printing and/or handed out in class.

Course Schedule:

Day-Date	Topic(s)	Required Readings & Writing Assignment
Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 8:00 a.m.-8:50 a.m., Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II	Introduction to Ethics; Introduction to Logic; Values in Science	READINGS: 1. Bernard Rollin, Preface, Ch. 1, “The Waxing and Waning of Faith in Science,” Ch. 2, “Scientific Ideology and ‘Value Free’ Science,” in Science and Ethics (Cambridge UP 2006). 2. James Rachels, “Some Basic Points About Arguments” from The Right Thing to Do (McGraw Hill): http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-on-arguments.pdf 3. Rachels, “A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy,” from The Right Thing to Do (McGraw Hill): http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-intro-to-ethics.pdf 4. Tom Regan, “The Case for Animal Rights,” (widely reprinted) (provides an overview of ethical theory and a defense of theory of moral rights for humans and animals who are “subjects of a life”): http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/regancase_for_animal_rights.pdf 5. Ch. 3, “What is Ethics?” in Science and Ethics (Cambridge UP 2006). WRITING ASSIGNMENT 1 (due at the beginning of class): Rachels, Regan and Rollin survey some influential moral theories. Which theory or theories are best – in terms of explaining the basic difference between right and wrong actions? Why? Explain the theory (or theories) and why it (or they) is (or are) best. Explain why other theories are inferior. Defend your view with reasons. 3 pages.
Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:00 a.m.-8:50 a.m., Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II	Human & Animal Experimentation	READINGS: 1. Rollin, Ch. 4., “Ethics and Research on Human Beings,” in Science and Ethics. 2. Tom Regan, “Empty Cages” (widely reprinted): http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/regan-emptycages.htm 3. Bernard Rollin, Ch. 5, “Animal Research,” in Science and Ethics. 4. “The Case for the Use of Animals in Biomedical Research,” Carl Cohen, The New England Journal of Medicine, 1986, 315: 865-870. http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/cohen.pdf WRITING ASSIGNMENT 2 (due at the beginning of class): First, summarize the arguably morally worse experiments done on human beings. Give what you think is the best explanation for why these experiments were morally wrong; give reasons why your explanation is best. Second, summarize the arguably morally worse experiments done on animals. Give what you think is the best explanation for why these experiments were (or are) morally wrong; give reasons why your explanation is best. Third, explain how your explanations for the wrongness of certain kinds of human experiments relate to your explanation of the morality of certain kinds of animal experiments: does one have implications for the other and vice-versa? Explain the relations. 3 pages.
Monday, June 8, 2009 11:00 a.m.-11:50 a.m. Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II	Poverty and Global Public Health: Charity or Justice in Resource Allocation?	READINGS: 1. “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” Peter Singer, The NY Times. http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/19990905.htm 2. Gregory Pence, Ch. 4. “UTILITARIANS VS. KANTIANS ON STOPPING AIDS,” from The Elements of Bioethics (McGraw Hill, 2006) http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/pence.pdf 3. “Racism and Health Care: A Medical Ethics Issue,” Annette Dula, from A Companion to African-American Philosophy (Blackwell, 2003). http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/dula.pdf 4. Introduction to sections on “Resource Allocation” in Singer and Kuhse (eds.) Bioethics: An Anthology (Blackwell, 2007) http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/resource-intro.pdf WRITING ASSIGNMENT 3 (due at the beginning of class): A number of philosophers, health-care professionals and activists have argued that we are morally obligated to focus greater attention on the needs of people living in poverty and absolute poverty, both domestically and abroad. What are their arguments? What challenges do these positions face? What, if anything, are we obligated to do to address the needs of these differing populations? Why?
Monday, June 9, 2009 11:00 a.m.-11:50 a.m. Nabrit-Mapp-McBay Lecture Room II	Final topic(s) of students’ choice: · Abortion? · Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide? · Cloning? · Genetic Engineering? · Something else? See the for Further Reading links for suggestions for topics and readings.	READINGS: 1. Rollin, Ch. 10., “Ethics and Science,” in Science and Ethics. Other Readings TBA WRITING ASSIGNMENT 4 (due at the beginning of class): TBA

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Criterion	Weight	Due Date
Attendance and Participation are REQUIRED
Writing Assignments will be graded on the basis of: Completeness, i.e., all aspects of the assignment are addressed, especially reasoned defenses of views. Understanding of the relevant theories and information. Clarity Organization Grammar and spelling.	25% each	See above; each writing assignment must be completed by the beginning of class on the day that we will discuss the topic that students read and wrote about; it will be collected at the end of class.

For Further Reading:

Medical Ethics: Accounts of the Cases that Shaped and Define Medical Ethics, Gregory Pence (McGraw Hill 2007) http://www.mhprofessional.com/product.php?search_crawl=true&isbn=0073535737

Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Edition, Helga Kuhse (Editor), Peter Singer (Editor)

ISBN: 978-1-4051-2948-0, March 2006, Wiley-Blackwell

http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1405129484.html

The Bioethics Reader: Editors' Choice

Ruth Chadwick (Editor), Helga Kuhse (Editor), Willem A. Landman (Editor), Udo Schüklenk (Editor), Peter Singer (Editor), September 2007, Wiley-Blackwell

http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1405175222,descCd-tableOfContents.html

Elements of Bioethics, Gregory Pence (McGraw-Hill 2006).

http://www.mhprofessional.com/product.php?search_crawl=true&isbn=0073132772

Public Health Ethics (PHE) is a peer-reviewed international journal with a focus on the systematic analysis of the moral problems that arise in public health and preventive medicine. PHE combines theoretical and practical work from many different fields, notably philosophy, law, and politics, but also epidemiology and the medical sciences.

http://phe.oxfordjournals.org/