Das Handbuch Angewandte Ethik soll folgenden beiden Interessen Rechnung tragen: sowohl dem allgemeinen Informationsbedarf, beispielsweise von Journalisten, Politikern, Rechtswissenschaftlern und Fachleuten der jeweils betroffenen Disziplinen, als auch dem spezifischen der Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Studierenden und Lehrenden in der Angewandten Ethik. Entsprechend öffnen die neun Teile des Buches mehrere Zugangswege in das Handbuch. Nicht nur der Aufbau des Handbuchs ist mehrdimensional, auch die Beiträge stammen aus unterschiedlichen Bildungshintergründen und Arbeitskontexten. So wie die Angewandte Ethik durch die verschiedenen Fächer und Traditionen geprägt (...) ist, aus denen ihre Vertreterinnen und Vertreter stammen, so lassen auch die Kapitel dieses Handbuchs deutlich die persönliche Handschrift und Haltung der einzelnen Autorinnen und Autoren erkennen. Für die Leser:innen erschließt sich damit neben der inhaltlichen auch die soziokulturelle Vielschichtigkeit der modernen Angewandten Ethik. (shrink)

Ethische Fragen betreffen alle Gesellschaftsbereiche. Sie stellen sich bei Themen wie sozialer Gerechtigkeit sowie in politischen oder ökologischen Debatten. Das Handbuch erfasst die Angewandte Ethik systematisch und historisch, beschreibt ihre rechtliche und institutionelle Situation sowie die relevanten Teilbereiche, wie z.B. Forschungs-, Wirtschafts- und Bioethik. Im Zentrum stehen konkrete Fragen aus dem Privat- und Sozialleben des Menschen, der medizinischen Ethik sowie der Umwelt- und Tierethik.

The concept of human dignity, despite its growing importance in legal texts and declarations in the last decades, is notoriously contested in moral philosophy and legal theory. There is no agreement either on what human dignity is or whether one should care much about it. We will show how these questions could be answered given the assumption that the expression ‘human dignity’ is to be read literally, as dignity of humans, where ‘dignity’ is understood as dignity proper, i.e. dignity as (...) it is usually ascribed outside of legal contexts. Dignity proper has played an important role in the history of mankind. It is sometimes also called ‘social dignity’ because it is bound to social relations, or ‘contingent dignity’, on the assumption that having dignity proper is due to contingencies of life and one's own behaviour (in contrast to human dignity as an essential feature of humankind). Dignity proper therefore depends on being treated with respect by others and on being able to present oneself as being of equal dignity in various practical contexts. Dignity proper is part of an extended conceptual space of evaluative terms which are important in moral life, including, among others, decency, nobility, rank, honour, respect, esteem, grace, decorum, merit, self-respect, coolness, offence, humiliation, degradation, shame. It is obvious, historically, that the concept of dignity proper must have played some role in the development of the concept of human dignity. (shrink)

Human dignity is a stubborn concept, at least for jurists and philosophers. After World War II it found its way immediately into the opening articles of the UN Charta, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the German Grundgesetz, apparently out of the blue, i. e. almost without any precedent in earlier juridical docu- ments. Consequently, scholars of law still have difficulties to formulate an adequate understanding of human dignity. And although the concept has a certain tradition in philosophy, if (...) we search for an independent ethi- cally attractive understanding of human dignity, it turns out that going back to Cicero, Kant or the Christian heritage is of little help, too. Much more promising, though, is a look at the long-standing usage of the expression ‘human dignity’ and its German counterpart Würde des Menschen where something like a universal right not to be humiliated is expressed. Given this understanding, we can read the commandment to respect human dignity as the basic obligation to treat other people in a way that allows them to keep their personal, individual dignities—or at least minimally decent ones. To be sure, this formulation is just a very first, tentative step on the way to a philosophically satisfying conception of human dignity, but in the author’s opinion it is definitely a promising start for a research group. (shrink)

Jeder Mensch hat eine Würde. Daraus scheint unmittelbar zu folgen, dass es kategorisch verboten ist, andere Menschen zu verachten. Aber so einfach ist das mit der Verachtung nicht. Denn schnell lassen sich Beispiele finden, bei denen es nicht offensichtlich falsch ist, wenn ein Mensch einen anderen Menschen verachtet. Wenn das Opfer eines Verbrechens den Täter verachtet, dann erscheint das durchaus angemessen, vielleicht sogar eine begrüßenswerte Reaktion zu sein. Dafür möchte ich jedenfalls auf der Grundlage der Würdetheorie von Ralf Stoecker argumentieren.

There is a widely accepted view in action theory (most prominently defended by Donald Davidson) according to which (1) actions are events, (2) reasons are intentional attitudes of the agent (pairs of beliefs and desires), and (3) acting for a reason entails that the reason rationalizes as well as causes the action. In the first part of my contribution I list seventeen difficulties for this standard account; in the second part I give an outline of how a more plausible conception (...) of reasons and actions could look like. According to this conception, which is based on Gilbert Ryle’s criticism of a mechanistic understanding of psychological concepts, agency is due to a special kind of disposition of the agent, namely the disposition to behave as if the agent were permanently deliberating about what to do. The conception has surprising consequences for the ontological status of intentional attitudes and actions and for the relationship between action and responsibility. (shrink)

Davidson's account of action explanation is at the core of his theory of action and hence of his philosophy in general. Usually, Davidson is regarded as the typical exponent of a standard causal understanding of action explanation. A closer look at his writings reveals, however, that his approach is much more sophisticated, for example, by distinguishing between causes and causal powers and counting reasons among the latter, which allows him to give satisfactory answers to a number of standard problems in (...) action theory, for example, the validity of the logical connection argument, the problem of causal exclusion, and the problem of wayward causal chains. Moreover, it becomes clear in which way his understanding of action explanations fits with his thesis about the anomalous nature of the mental and his theory of radical interpretation in the philosophy of language. (shrink)

This chapter relates the problem of demarcating the pathological from the non-pathological in psychiatry to the general problem of defining ‘disease’ in the philosophy of medicine. Section 2 revisits three prominent debates in medical nosology: naturalism versus normativism, the three dimensions of illness, sickness, and disease, and the demarcation problem. Sections 3–5 reformulate the demarcation problem in terms of semantic vagueness. ‘Disease’ exhibits vagueness of degree by drawing no sharp line in a continuum and is combinatorially vague because there are (...) several criteria for the term’s use that might fall apart. Combinatorial vagueness explains why the other two debates appear hopeless: Should we construe ‘disease’ in a naturalistic or in a normative way? Neither answer is satisfactory. How should we balance the three dimensions of pathology? We do not have to, because illness, sickness and disease (narrowly conceived) are non-competing criteria for the application of the cluster term ‘disease’. (shrink)

In der 1970 gegründeten Reihe erscheinen Arbeiten, die philosophiehistorische Studien mit einem systematischen Ansatz oder systematische Studien mit philosophiehistorischen Rekonstruktionen verbinden. Neben deutschsprachigen werden auch englischsprachige Monographien veröffentlicht. Gründungsherausgeber sind: Erhard Scheibe (Herausgeber bis 1991), Günther Patzig (bis 1999) und Wolfgang Wieland (bis 2003). Von 1990 bis 2007 wurde die Reihe von Jürgen Mittelstraß mitherausgegeben.

This book collects twelve original articles, arranged in three sections, plus an introduction.

Die Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar. – Trotz ihrer prominenten Rolle im Grundgesetz und in vielen anderen Dokumenten nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg hat sich die moderne Philosophie lange Zeit nur wenig um die Menschenwürde gekümmert. Erst als um die Jahrtausendwende herum die Würde von Embryonen zur Diskussion stand, zeigte es sich, wie spannend und schwierig es ist, ein angemessenes philosophisches Verständnis der Menschenwürde zu finden. Dieses Buch basiert auf drei Grundgedanken: dass die Menschenwürde aus ihren Verletzungen heraus verstanden werden muss, (...) dass wir sie in ihrem historischen Kontext betrachten sollten und dass es vor allen Dingen wichtig ist, ihre vielfältige Verwendung in unterschiedlichen Feldern der Angewandten Ethik zu untersuchen. Entsprechend vereint das Buch theoretische philosophische Überlegungen mit konkreten Untersuchungen zu öffentlich vieldiskutierten Themen wie Hirntod, assistiertem Suizid, Todesstrafe und Ehrenmord. Reflexionen zur Würde des Kindes, des Alters und des Sterbens bilden den Abschluss des Buches. Dabei erweist es sich, dass der Menschenwürde eine unverzichtbare Rolle in der Ethik zukommt, weil sie die Bedeutung eines für jedermann geltenden Schutzes vor Erniedrigungen ausdrückt, und damit für uns alle einen – vielleicht sogar den – Kern unseres moralischen Status formuliert. (shrink)

This book examines the epistemic function of perception and the relation between language and conceptual thought, and provides new ways of conceptualizing the Buddhist defense of the reflexivity thesis of consciousness: namely, that each cognitive event is to be understood as involving a pre-reflective implicit awareness of its own occurrence.

The following paper is devoted to the discussion of three important and closely interlocked topics in the philosophy of Donald Davidson, the questions: What are reasons? — What are actions? — And: What is the relation between a reason and an action, when the reason explains the action by giving the agent's reason for doing what he did? The last question is actually a quotation; it is the first sentence of Davidson's famous article Actions, Reasons, and Carnes. Although subse-quently modified (...) in various important respects, it still provides the meta-physical groundwork for Davidson's later views on action theory and the philosophy of mind. It is this metaphysical basis that I want to concentrate on. Offhand, Davidson's answers to all the three questions are common in philosophical action theory: Actions are events, reasons are causes of those events, and giving the agent's reason explains an action because it explains the action causally. In what follows, I shall first recapitulate Davidson's reasoning toward the third claim, which I take to be true and to be what Davidson thinks. In discussing a possible objection against this claim I shall then try to show that the second thesis, the thesis that reasons are causes, is neither true nor is it Davidson's opinion. And finally, I want to argue with regard to the first thesis that although Davidson actually holds that actions are events, he should better abandon this position. (shrink)

Given the many marvelous things animals can do and moreover the success we have in employing the intentional stance towards animals, it seems to be almost unthinkable to say that animals could not act at all. Nonetheless, this is exactly what I argue for. I claim that strictly speaking there is no animal action, only behaviour. I defend this claim in three steps. Firstly, I recapitulate some of the weighty grounds that speak in favour of animal agency. Secondly, I explain (...) why I still doubt that animals act. The argument is that the account of agency that I take to be the most attractive one entails that animals can't act. Since this account of agency is non-standard, I spend the bulk of the paper with providing a sketch of what, according to it, actions are. Finally, I explain why it is still so natural and promising to regard animals as agents, although in fact they aren't. As one might put it: of course they act, only strictly speaking they don't. (shrink)

This article looks at two strains of urban community organizing, distinguished by philosophy and often by gender, and influenced by the historical division of American society into public and private spheres. The authors compare the well-known Alinsky model, which focuses on communities organizing for power, and what they call the women-centered model, which focuses on organizing relationships to build community. These models are rooted in somewhat distinct traditions and vary along several dimensions, including conceptions of human nature and conflict, power (...) and politics, leadership, and the organizing process. The authors conclude by examining the implications of this analysis and questions for further research and practice. (shrink)

The classic programme of conceptual engineering (Cappelen, Herman. 2018. Fixing Language: An Essay on Conceptual Engineering. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Eklund, Matti. 2021. “Conceptual Engineering.” In The Routledge Handbook of Social and Political Philosophy of Language, edited by Justin Khoo, and Rachel Sterken, 15–30. London: Routledge) envisages a two-stage ameliorating process. First, we assess ‘F’ and determine what the term should express. Second, we bring it about that ‘F’ expresses what it should express. The second stage gives rise to a (...) practical challenge: the implementation challenge. Engineering advocates need to explain by what means they can implement specific conceptual changes in the natural language shared by a community – a feat Herman Cappelen (2018. Fixing Language: An Essay on Conceptual Engineering. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020; “Conceptual Engineering: The Master Argument.” In Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics, edited by Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen, and David Plunkett, 132–151. Oxford: Oxford University Press) argues to be beyond our understanding and control both on an externalist and on an internalist meta-semantics. I devise a new answer to the implementation challenge. Enlisting the influential theory of social norms by Cristina Bicchieri, I argue that engineering social norms in Bicchieri’s technical sense amounts to an effective, specific, and feasible means to implement specific conceptual change, at least on internalist premises. I also argue that Bicchieri’s social norms are an essential addition to the more familiar conventions and moral norms when it comes to conceptual engineering. (shrink)

Ist es sinnvoll, krank zu sein? – Diese seltsam anmutende Frage bietet den Auftakt für eine philosophische Untersuchung, was unter dem Sinn einer Krankheit verstanden werden kann und was das Interessante an diesen Konzeptionen ist. Ausgangspunkt ist die Feststellung, dass der Ausdruck „Sinn“ offenkundig mehrdeutig ist. Man kann damit sprachliche Bedeutung, Zwecke oder Motive meinen. Es kann aber auch um den narrativen Sinn im biographischen Leben oder um das Verhältnis der Krankheit zum Lebenssinn eines Menschen gehen. Gerade die letzten beiden (...) Lesarten erweisen sich als aufschlussreich: die Einbindung der Krankheiten in den Lebenslauf und Krankheiten als Anstoß, sich über das eigene Leben Gedanken zu machen. Krankheiten könnten so den Effekt haben, ein sinnvolleres Leben zu führen, sie könnten uns aber auch die ultimative Sinnlosigkeit unseres Daseins vor Augen führen. (shrink)

Das deutsche Gesundheitswesen steht durch die schnell steigende Anzahl an CO- VID-19-Erkrankten vor erheblichen Herausforderungen. In dieser Krisensituation sind alle Beteiligten mit ethischen Fragen konfrontiert, beispielsweise nach gerech- ten Verteilungskriterien bei begrenzten Ressourcen und dem gesundheitlichen Schutz des Personals angesichts einer bisher nicht therapierbaren Erkrankung. Daher werden schon jetzt klinische und ambulante Ethikberatungsangebote verstärkt mit Anfragen nach Unterstützung konfrontiert. Wie können Ethikberater*innen Entscheidungen in der Krankenversorgung im Rahmen der COVID-19-Pandemie unterstützen? Welche Grenzen von Ethikberatung sind zu beachten? Bislang liegen hierzu (...) noch wenige praktische Erfahrungen vor. Angesichts der dynamischen Entwicklung erscheint es der Akademie für Ethik in der Medizin (AEM) wichtig, einen Diskurs über die angemessene Rolle der Ethikberatung bei der Bewältigung der vielfachen Heraus- forderungen durch die COVID-19-Pandemie zu führen und professionelle Hinweise zu geben. Mit dem vorliegenden Diskussionspapier möchte die AEM einen Beitrag zur Beantwortung wesentlicher Fragen leisten, die sich für die Ethikberatung in den verschiedenen Bereichen des Gesundheitswesens stellen. Sie regt an, diesen Dis- kurs weiter zu führen und hat ein Online-Forum (s. unten) eingerichtet, in dem Ethikberater*innen ihre Erfahrungen teilen und die professionelle Selbstreflexion der Ethikberatung in Pandemiezeiten mit Anregungen fördern können. (shrink)

This paper maps out various options for thinking about two issues: the structural relationship between practical wisdom and the moral virtues, and the various functions of practical wisdom. With the help of a case study of the virtue of honesty, three main concerns are raised for what I call the Standard Model of practical wisdom. Two other models, the Socratic Model and the Fragmentation Model, are also critically evaluated. I end by taking seriously an eliminativist approach according to which the (...) trait of practical wisdom does not exist. (shrink)

Der Rückgriff auf die Menschenwürde ist in der modernen angewandten Ethik verbreitet, sein Stellenwert ist aber, wie sich auch in vielen Beiträgen dieses Buches zeigt, moraltheoretisch höchst umstritten. Es ist nicht nur unklar, ob die Menschenwürde tatsächlich ein eigenständig zu respektierendes Gut ist, sondern vor allem, was Menschenwürde überhaupt ist und welches Verhalten sie von uns fordert. Diese Unklarheiten wecken wiederum Zweifel daran, ob es sinnvoll ist, der Menschenwürde einen prominenten Platz in der Ethik zuzuweisen (jenseits eines „Präambel- und Bekenntnisdaseins“, (...) wie Martina Herrmann es in ihrem Beitrag ausgedrückt hat). Das Ziel meines Beitrags ist es, zu zeigen, dass dies nicht nur sinnvoll, sondern sogar notwendig ist, weil man ohne Rückgriff auf die Menschenwürde dem besonderen ethischen Charakter bestimmter Handlungen nicht gerecht werden kann, deren Verwerflichkeit darin liegt, ihre Opfer zu demütigen, zu erniedrigen, zu entwürdigen. Die Konzentration auf Missachtungen der Menschenwürde macht aber nicht nur die Notwendigkeit deutlich, die Würde moralphilosophisch ernst zu nehmen, sie eröffnet zugleich eine Chance für ein angemessenes Verständnis. (shrink)

Human dignity is one of the key concepts of our ethical evaluations, in politics, in biomedicine, as well as in everyday life. In moral philosophy, however, human dignity is a source of intractable trouble. It has a number of characteristic features which apparently do not fit into one coherent ethical concept. Hence, philosophers tend to ignore or circumvent the concept. There is hope for a philosophically attractive conception of human dignity, however, given that one takes three crucial turns. The negative (...) turn: to start the inquiry with violations of human dignity. The inductive turn: to consider the whole range of applications of the concept of human dignity in different areas of ethics. And finally, the historical turn: to take into account the historical bonds between human dignity and traditional conceptions of dignity. Taken together they point in the direction of an understanding of human dignity as universal nobility. (shrink)

How should you decide what to do when you’re uncertain about basic normative principles? A natural suggestion is to follow some "second-order:" norm: e.g., obey the most probable norm or maximize expected choiceworthiness. But what if you’re uncertain about second-order norms too—must you then invoke some third-order norm? If so, any norm-guided response to normative uncertainty appears doomed to a vicious regress. This paper aims to rescue second-order norms from the threat of regress. I first elaborate and defend the claim (...) some philosophers have made that the regress problem forces us to accept normative externalism, the view that at least one norm is incumbent on all agents regardless of their normative beliefs. But, I then argue, we need not accept externalism about first-order norms, thus closing off any question of how agents should respond to normative uncertainty. Rather, we can head off the threat of regress by ascribing external force to a single second-order norm: the enkratic principle. (shrink)

Der Begriff der Menschenwürde ist einer der prominentesten ethischen Begriffe überhaupt und bildet den Angelpunkt für heiß umstrittene Themen der angewandten Ethik. Umso verblüffender ist es, dass die moralphilosophische Theorie bis heute große Probleme hat, ihm eine geeignete Rolle zuzuweisen. Die in diesem Buch versammelten internationalen Beiträge setzen bei diesem prinzipiellen Problem an, um den Begriff der Menschenwürde dann auf ganz unterschiedlichen Wegen an einen passenden theoretischen Ort zu führen.

MoralischePrinzip(ien)DoppelwirkungsprinzipBewertungenBewertung, moralischekönnenTun, Unterlassen, Zulassen sich auf Unterschiedliches beziehen, beispielsweise auf Personen, Gesetze oder ganze Gesellschaften. Im Zentrum der Moral stehen aber Handlungen und Handlungsweisen, denn durch Handlungen greifen Menschen in die Welt ein und müssen sich folglich auch dafür verantworten (s. Kap. 31). Während sich konsequentialistischeKonsequentialismus Ethiken darauf beschränken, Handlungen allein an ihren Folgen zu messen, legen nicht-konsequentialistische Ethiken andere oder zusätzliche Maßstäbe an.

The developement of intensive care and transplantation medicine gave rise to ethical problems of the proper treatment of dying patients: How long should they be upheld and from which point on could their organs be removed? Brain oriented concepts of death promised to ease these problems, but on closer look turn out to be untenable. Hence, an alternative attitude towards death and the morally proper treatment of the dying is urgently needed. In former times, before intensive care was developed, death (...) always had comprised various different changes, usually losses, which do not necessarily or conceptually belong to death, but which none the less were responsible for the moral weight we still attach to death. Modern medicine cut the joints between these losses, and hence dissolved the traditional, morally weighty concept of death. This leaves medical ethics with the task to inquire, one by one, into the ethical consequences of these different losses. Die Entwicklung der Intensiv- und Transplantationsmedizin hat eine Reihe neuartiger medizinethischer Probleme entstehen lassen: die Fragen, bis wann man einen Menschen mit allen Mitteln am Leben erhalten und ab wann man ihm lebensnotwendige Organe entnehmen darf. Die Identifikation des menschlichen Todes mit dem Hirntod bot eine attraktive Auflösung dieser Schwierigkeiten, ist aber in den letzten Jahren zunehmend in die Kritik geraten, weil die begrifflich/weltanschaulichen Argumente, die für diese Gleichsetzung angeführt werden, einer Überprüfung nicht standhalten. Es gilt anzuerkennen, daß die medizinische Entwicklung nicht etwa eine Neudefinition des Todes erforderlich, sondern jede derartige Definition müßig gemacht hat, weil die Auffächerung der Sterbeprozesse in der Intensivmedizin die herkömmliche Annahme, daß mit dem Tod ein plötzlicher Umschwung im moralischen Status eines Menschen verbunden ist, ihrer Legitimation beraubt. An ihre Stelle tritt die Anerkennung einer ganzen Reihe verschiedener moralisch folgenreicher Veränderungen , die ein Mensch im Laufe seines Sterbens durchmacht. Es ist die Aufgabe der medizinischen Ethik, die Auswirkungen dieser Veränderungen auf die Patienten-Arzt-Beziehung zu erforschen. (shrink)

I offer a justification for the received view that the characteristic feature of agents is to be found in the particular way their behaviour is explainable. Agents are people who have acquired three skills: (i) to act in accordance with inner or public deliberation; (ii) to do many things almost as if they had deliberated; and (iii) to recognize situations where it is worthwhile to switch from the second to the first skill. We can therefore assume that agents behave as (...) if they were accompanying their behaviour by constant thinking although they don't actually deliberate all the time. This view allows for some attractive solutions for notorious problems in action theory but has the surprising ontological consequence that, although there are agents in action, there are no actions. (shrink)

Mental causation comes in different shapes, but certainly one of the most conspicuous instances of mental causation is intentional action – when we do something because we want to do it. At least, most action theorists and philosophers of mind take it for granted that intentional action is an instance of mental causation, since they assume first that desires are mental and second that doing something because one wants to do it is to be accounted for causally. Yet, these philosophers (...) face a well-known problem: it may happen that our desires cause what is wanted without that being an instance of our intentionally doing what is wanted. Prima facie, what is wrong in these cases is that the causal path leading from desires to actions goes ‘wayward’ instead of taking the right track, apt for intentional action. Hence, action theorists have tried to specify the right tracks of action causation. But since this turned out to be an awfully tricky task, the idea came up that the whole enterprise may have been ill-advised from the beginning. As I shall argue, this suspicion is correct. Although the two assumptions leading to the problem of waywardness are true (if understood in the right way), the idea of causal paths connecting desires with actions is wrong and should be replaced by a quite different picture of the causal role of desires in agency: desires and other intentional attitudes are causal powers which are actualized in intentional agency. This alternative picture not only has the advantage of accounting for the notorious cases of waywardness, it also relieves some doubts concerning the conceivability of a causal influence of desires in a world of material causes. However, I shall confine myself to the problem of waywardness. My contribution has twelve sections. In section 1, I sketch a standard story about the way we influence the world, and I mention two well known problems discussed in the theory of action. Sections 2 and 3 present three cases of wayward causal chains that pose a third problem for the standard picture. I shall go on to discuss mainly two of them, cases of so-called basic versus non-basic waywardness (section 4) . To understand what is wayward in these cases one needs to understand the special function of ‘by’-sentences (section 5) and the causal role of intentional attitudes (sections 6-8). Sections 9-11 explain the idea that intentional attitudes are causal powers of agents. As it turns out, this accounts smoothly for the two prime examples, but leaves unaddressed a third kind of wayward causal chains. Section 12 closes with an attempt to extend the account to those cases, too, thereby connecting human agency with freedom. (shrink)

This article examines the methodology of a core branch of contemporary political theory or philosophy: “analytic” political theory. After distinguishing political theory from related fields, such as political science, moral philosophy, and legal theory, the article discusses the analysis of political concepts. It then turns to the notions of principles and theories, as distinct from concepts, and reviews the methods of assessing such principles and theories, for the purpose of justifying or criticizing them. Finally, it looks at a recent debate (...) on how abstract and idealized political theory should be, and assesses the significance of disagreement in political theory. The discussion is carried out from an angle inspired by the philosophy of science. (shrink)

Humean Laws for Human Agents presents cutting-edge research by leading experts on the Humean account of laws, chance, possibility, and necessity. A central question in metaphysics and philosophy of science is: What are laws of nature? Humeans hold that laws are not sui generis metaphysical entities but merely particularly effective summaries of what actually happens. The most discussed recent work on Humeanism emphasizes the laws' usefulness for limited agents and uses pragmatic considerations to address fundamental and long-standing problems. The current (...) volume develops and critically examines pragmatic Humean accounts, with innovative new work on the epistemology of laws and chance, the problem of induction, counterfactuals, special science laws, and a Humean account of essence. Taken together, the papers provide a roadmap for developing pragmatic Humeanism and connate views, setting the agenda for future research. (shrink)

Most people who are regular consumers of psychoactive drugs are not drug addicts, nor will they ever become addicts. In neurobiological theories, non-addictive drug consumption is acknowledged only as a “necessary” prerequisite for addiction, but not as a stable and widespread behavior in its own right. This target article proposes a new neurobiological framework theory for non-addictive psychoactive drug consumption, introducing the concept of “drug instrumentalization.” Psychoactive drugs are consumed for their effects on mental states. Humans are able to learn (...) that mental states can be changed on purpose by drugs, in order to facilitate other, non-drug-related behaviors. We discuss specific “instrumentalization goals” and outline neurobiological mechanisms of how major classes of psychoactive drugs change mental states and serve non-drug-related behaviors. We argue that drug instrumentalization behavior may provide a functional adaptation to modern environments based on a historical selection for learning mechanisms that allow the dynamic modification of consummatory behavior. It is assumed that in order to effectively instrumentalize psychoactive drugs, the establishment of and retrieval from a drug memory is required. Here, we propose a new classification of different drug memory subtypes and discuss how they interact during drug instrumentalization learning and retrieval. Understanding the everyday utility and the learning mechanisms of non-addictive psychotropic drug use may help to prevent abuse and the transition to drug addiction in the future. (shrink)

Since the middle of the 20th century our ability to manage death has changed. The dying of a human being can be hastened, slowed or even forestalled. As a result we need to reconsider death as a prerequisite for organ donation and hence the brain death criterion. In Germany, the debate about that criterion has been going on for some months. The author outlines that debate and discusses problems arising from a new category of donors, the so-called non-heartbeating donors. He (...) explains what consequences follow for the ethics of organ donation, especially for the notion of death as its prerequisite. Im vorliegenden Beitrag zeichnet der Autor zunächst die Grundzüge der Hirntod-Debatte nach. Daran anschließend setzt er sich mit der Problematik der neuen Spendergruppe der non-heartbeating donors auseinander. Am Ende erläutert der Autor, welche Konsequenzen daraus für die Ethik der Organspende, genau genommen für die Rolle des Todes als Voraussetzung der Organspende, zu ziehen sind. (shrink)

Mit wenigen Ausnahmen war bis zum Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs in keiner Verfassung der Welt von der Würde des Menschen die Rede. Erst in der Charta der Vereinten Nationen von 1945, also vier Jahre vor der Verabschiedung des Grundgesetzes, wird als Gründungszweck der UN das Bestreben angeführt: “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person”. In der Allgemeinen Menschenrechtserklärung von 1948 ist dann schon wiederholt von der Würde die Rede, so etwa gleich (...) zu Anfang in der Präambel und im ersten Satz von Art.1. Ein Jahr später wird das Grundgesetz verabschiedet, und seitdem findet sich in nahezu allen neu verabschiedeten Verfassungen und Deklarationen bis hin zum Vertrag von Lissabon an zentraler Stelle ein Hinweis auf die Würde des Menschen. Aus rechtswissenschaftlicher Sicht entsteht somit das Problem, dass es einerseits die Prominenz des Menschenwürdebegriffs unvermeidlich macht, ihn juristisch sorgfältig aufzuklären und zu erläutern, dass dies aber mangels einer juristischen Tradition seiner Verwendung extrem schwer fällt. Gerade die deutsche Rechtswissenschaft ringt deshalb bis heute um ein akzeptables Menschenwürdeverständnis. In der Philosophie gibt es hingegen kein Grundgesetz und keine Allgemeine Menschenrechtserklärung, deshalb ist es nicht so unmittelbar einsichtig, weshalb die Philosophie Probleme mit dem Begriff der Menschenwürde haben sollte. Und tatsächlich war die Menschenwürde für die Philosophinnen und Philosophen der Nachkriegszeit lange Zeit kein dringendes Thema. Das änderte sich in Deutschland erst in den neunziger Jahren mit dem zunehmenden Interesse an der Bioethik, die zu einer verstärkten Annäherung zwischen der Moralphilosophie, den Rechtswissenschaften, der Theologie und der Medizin führte. Der entscheidende Umschwung ereignete sich allerdings erst kurz nach der Jahrtausendwende, als eine Reihe prominenter Philosophen in der Zeit eine Debatte darüber austrugen, ob Embryonen eine Menschenwürde haben oder nicht. Spätestens seitdem ist die Frage, worin die Würde des Menschen besteht, eine der zentralen Fragen der angewandten Ethik in Deutschland. Zunächst scheint die Philosophie gegenüber den Rechtswissenschaften den großen Vorteil zu haben, dass es durchaus eine Tradition philosophischer Auseinandersetzungen mit der Würde des Menschen gibt, wenn auch keine besonders umfangreiche. Wie sich allerdings beim näheren Hinsehen zeigt, kann der Blick in die Tradition eher dazu dienen, die Probleme deutlich zu machen, die uns der Begriff der Menschenwürde bereitet, als dass sich uns unmittelbar eine Lösung aufdrängen würde. (shrink)

Is self-respect a necessary condition for human dignity ? On the one hand, if it were a necessary condition, we could neither respect nor violate the human dignity of small children, severely mentally disabled and unconscious persons, which would certainly be an absurd consequence. On the other hand, it seems to be characteristic for violations of human dignity that they are humiliating for the victim, and humiliation usually is construed as a violation of self-respect. The dilemma is solved when we (...) realize that self-respect is a disposition to take care of one’s personal dignity, and that human dignity basically consists in having the opportunity of maintaining one’s personal dignity. Since personal dignity does not disappear when a person looses her ability to take care of it, respecting human dignity may consist in taking care of someone’s personal dignity who has lost self-respect. Therefore, self-respect is not necessary for human dignity. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: References: primary sources and their abbreviations Further reading.

Advocates of legalization of physician-assisted suicide usually argue that it is as matter of respect for human dignity that people get help in ending their lives (1) because the prohibition interferes with a fundamental liberty to conduct life according to one’s own preferences and (2) because sometimes suicide is an appropriate measure to avoid living an undignified life. In this chapter, it is argued that although the first argument is strong, the second argument is misguided. Hence, from an ethical perspective, (...) society should not legally prohibit physician-assisted suicide. Yet, the person him- or herself should not commit suicide either. In particularly, the person should not regard such a suicide as a demand of his or her dignity. (shrink)