An Ethics of Emotions

International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 2022

This introduction provides brief outlines of the articles collected in this special issue of the International Journal of Philosophical Studies on the topic of Ethics and Emotions. It also announces the winners of the 2021 Robert Papazian and PERITIA prizes.

Human Emotions and the Origin of Bioethics, 2020

This book provides a unique phenomenological dialogue between psychology and philosophy on the origin of bioethics that shows the importance of bringing emotions into bioethical discourse. Divided into two parts, the book begins by defining bioethics and explaining the importance of emotions in making us human, allowing us to consider life holistically. Ferrarello argues that emotions and bioethics are better served when they are combined, and that dismissing emotions as nothing more than a nuisance to our rationality has created a society that does not fit our human nature. Chapters explore how ethics relate to intimate life and how ethical agents determine themselves within their surrounding world, uniquely and interrogatively using ‘bioethics’ to consider not only medical dilemmas but also issues concerning environmental and individual well-being. By addressing personal, interpersonal, and societal problems as dynamically interconnected in bioethical problems she helps us to renew our sense of responsibility toward a good quality of life. This interdisciplinary book is a good reading for students of health science, psychology, and philosophy, as well as for those interested in the link between emotions and bioethical discourse from both a psychological and philosophical perspective.

2009

Ethics: The Key Thinkers (2nd edition), 2023

third-party websites referred to or in this book. All internet addresses given in this book were correct at the time of going to press. The author and publisher regret any inconvenience caused if addresses have changed or sites have ceased to exist, but can accept no responsibility for any such changes.

Journal of Moral Philosophy, 2013

We are inundated with Companions, Handbooks, and Encyclopedias of every shape, format, and range of content, but not, alas, of every size. Perhaps because of the nature of the beast, none is less than massive, and this volume is no exception, at 850 pages long. There is, of course, much worth reading in this new addition to the growing corpus. There are many excellent and illuminating pieces by experts in their field. It is no criticism of their work to ask, however, what the purpose of such books, as well as of this particular book, is. The general question is raised by the accessibility ofso much useful material on the internet; in particular, the comprehensive and frequently updated Stanford Encyclopedia. Why pay good money for a bulky volume that will take up rather a lot of shelf space when you can surf the Internet for free? Maybe such books are intended primarily to be purchased by libraries. To what purpose? Are professors going to trek to the library to consult it? Are they going to tell their students to do so? No doubt for any given ethics course there will be one or two individual articles that might be relevant, but is it likely that students will make the effort to use the library in this way when so much, and of such high quality, is available online? Things would be considerably improved if Routledge were to make this volume available as an e-book, or online, as they have with their truly comprehensive online Encyclopedia. (Though 1 notice that Amazon offer a Kindle version at less than the paperback price-quite a bargain.) The more specific question is raised by its scope. The editor describes it, quite correctly, as 'comprehensive'. It contains 68 chapters, divided into six sections: history; meta-ethics, impact of social sciences on ethics; ethical theories; moral concepts; applied ethics. Comprehensiveness brings in its train, however, some risks and disadvantages. Chapters have to be kept reasonably short, and though many writers do an excellent Job in clearly conveying a lot of information in a short space, sometimes material is too brief or perfunctory to be helpful, or even comprehensible. This is especially true of chapters that attempt to cover whole movements, or periods of thought. Take, for example, the two pieces on Natural Law Theory, in its early modem and contemporary garbs. Both authors are immensely knowledgeable in their fields, but both felt constrained to cover too much territory in their small compass. The eleven page entry on early modern versions of Natural Law theory discussed Grotius, Hobbes, Spinoza, Cumberland, Locke, Pufendorf, Leibniz, Wolff, and a number of enlightenment thinkers. In cases like this, the only person who can really understand the summary article is one who is already expert in the area. But she is unlikely to have much use for so skeletal an oudine of her area of expertise. For wider audiences, such as the students of philosophy for whom this collection is primarily intended, less comprehensiveness and more depth would have been preferable. The intelligibility of these chapters is not helped by the fact that there is no entry on Aquinas. To discuss natural law theory without discussion of Aquinas is like staging Hamlet without the prince. (Skorupski

Journal of Medical Ethics, 2021

It is common to think of medical and ethical modes of thought as different in kind. In such terms, some clinical situations are made more complicated by an additional ethical component. Against this picture, we propose that medical and ethical modes of thought are not different in kind, but merely different aspects of what it means to be human. We further propose that clinicians are uniquely positioned to synthesise these two aspects without prior knowledge of philosophical ethics.

Bauman's Challenge: Sociological Issues for the 21st Century, 2010

1995

English studies is paralyzed by the view that "the imposition of ideological agendas... [is]...morally questionable," yet "our moral sensibility motivates us to promote particular ethic positions." The field is caught in this dilemma because its postmodern skepticism forces it to acknowledge that there are no universal values, yet its teachers and scholars want a subject position allowing them to appeal to some standards even if they are not universal. The question this ,:ilemma raises is how can the fields of rhetoric and composition conceive of ethics in a postmodern manner and still allow for moral agency and authority. The problem with the "deontological" view, which characterizes the view of Western culture at large and the liberal enlightenment view of the academy, is that it decides what is right, good, and of value prior to any rhetorical discussion or inquiry. This means that the abstract values of an .:thical rhetoric are not tied to contextual constraints. In "After Virtue," Alasdair MacIntyre shows how arguments about abortion are constructed in such a way as to preclude any discussion; the speaker either forces her audience to accept her premises or labels that audience immoral. By directing attention to the subject, Michel Foucault suggests one possible way out of this predicament and points to inquiry into subjectivity theory. He encourages the speaker to ask, "How have I constructed myself as a moral agent?" (TB)

Modern Philology, 2020

2008

Background: In science governance, "ethics" and "public participation" are high on the political agenda. However, in political practice, the relation between "ethics" and "participation" remains undefined. While the latter emphasis the inclusion of a wider set of possible actors and interests, in particular lay people, "ethics" mostly rests on expert knowledge. The epistemic and political authority of ethics is justified by the difference between "ethics" as a reasoned and systematic reflection on moral presumptions, while "morality" is the unreflected attribution of "good" and "bad". Aims: It is the aim of this thesis to analyze how ethical lay, that is, members of the wider public and genomic researchers deal with ethical questions in an interactive setting without the involvement of ethical experts. Thereby, three dimensions were central: What kind of ethical issues did the participants give...