The Methodology of Moral Reasoning Nanoethics Lecture I

The Methodology of Moral Reasoning Nanoethics Lecture I Roderick T. Long Auburn Dept. of Philosophy

What will nanotechnology bring? A spectrum of views: extreme predictions, modest predictions, and in between

Extreme predictions: the hype Immortality! Godlike powers! Nanobots inside us curing all diseases! The ability to build or remold anything, including ourselves, from the atomic level up!

Extreme predictions: the hype Or on the gloomier side – out-ofcontrol nanobots devouring the earth!

Extreme predictions: Drexler and Kurzweil

Extreme predictions in ficiton

More modest predictions Fancy nanoengineering won’t work! 1. Too sticky 2. Brownian motion The most we can hope for may be ….

Modest predictions somewhat better soap.

What will nanotechnology bring? Most nanoscientists think the truth lies somewhere in between … which is pretty exciting!

Even on a moderate view, nanotechnology raises issues of ethics How should we balance public welfare and safety against academic freedom of researchers? How can we compare the weights of national security, corporate profit, public good, individual rights, environmental impact, and integrity of scientific enterprise?

Even on a moderate view, nanotechnology raises issues of ethics How should the benefits of, and/or the control over, nanotechnology be justly distributed? What are the ethical implications of altering human nature via nanotechnology?

Thinking About Ethics is a branch of philosophy. What is philosophy? Subject matter: questions about the ultimate nature of reality, knowledge, & value Method: dialectic = reflective equilibration

Three Main Branches of Philosophy Metaphysics: nature of reality Epistemology: nature of knowledge Axiology: nature of value Branches of axiology: ethics (moral value), aesthetics (artistic value)

Philosophy - How different from religion? - How different from science?

The Method of Philosophy: Dialectic Example: what’s a 7 -letter word for a large predator belonging to the cat family?

The Method of Philosophy: Dialectic Example: what’s a 7 -letter word for a large predator belonging to the cat family? PANTHER? LEOPARD? CHEETAH? LIONESS?

The Method of Philosophy: Dialectic What’s a 7 -letter word that’s the name of a famous vampire?

The Method of Philosophy: Dialectic What’s a 7 -letter word that’s the name of a famous vampire? DRACULA

The Method of Philosophy: Dialectic As in a crossword puzzle, so in dialectic, questions we can answer help us with questions we can’t answer. Consistency.

What Is Ethics? Subject-matter: good and bad, right and wrong. Method: reflective equilibration. (John Rawls, 1921 -2002)

Reflective Equilibration Achieving coherence among our beliefs Balancing general principles against particular cases Crossword puzzle method (Susan Haack, b. 1945)

Reflective Equilibration Socrates (c. 470 -399 BCE) called it dialectic

The Method of Philosophy: Dialectic Example from Plato’s dialogue Laches, featuring Socrates (c. 470 -399 BCE)

Socrates vs. Laches: What Is Courage? st 1 definition: standing firm in battle

Socrates vs. Laches: What Is Courage? st 1 definition: standing firm in battle Problem: too narrow

Socrates vs. Laches: What Is Courage? nd 2 definition: willingness to face danger

Socrates vs. Laches: What Is Courage? 2 nd definition: willingness to face danger Problem: when foolish, not admirable, so not a virtue, so not courageous

Socrates vs. Laches: What Is Courage? rd 3 definition: wise willingness to face danger

Socrates vs. Laches: What Is Courage? 3 rd definition: wise willingness to face danger Problem: takes more courage to act without wisdom

The Method of Philosophy: Dialectic Laches is led to revise uncertain views about the definition of courage by appeal to other views. DIALECTIC!

Dialectic in Action: The Debate Over Utilitarianism: The right action is whichever action produces the greatest total amount of social benefit (“the greatest happiness of the greatest number”)

Jeremy Bentham (1748 -1832) John Stuart Mill (1806 -1873)

Dialectic in Action: The Debate Over Utilitarianism The Organ Donor Case (ODC): You can save five patients by killing one and redistributing his organs. Should you?

Dialectic in Action: The Debate Over Utilitarianism Anti-Utilitarian argument: If utilitarianism were true, then in the ODC we should kill. But surely it would be wrong to kill in the ODC. So utilitarianism is false.

Dialectic in Action: The Debate Over Utilitarianism Utilitarian argument: It’s a mistake to assume that utilitarianism says to kill in ODC. Sometimes better to aim at goal indirectly.

Dialectic in Action: The Debate Over Utilitarianism Francis Bacon (1561 -1626): Experiments of fruit vs. experiments of light Also: referees

Dialectic in Action: The Debate Over Utilitarianism Utilitarian argument: Likewise, a general policy of sacrificing few to many would make all of society nervous Make society better off by committing ourselves to a principle prohibiting such sacrifices

Dialectic in Action: The Debate Over Utilitarianism Anti-Utilitarian argument: - If commitment is absolute, utilitarianism has been abandoned - If commitment isn’t absolute, problem isn’t solved - In any case, gives right answer for wrong reason