Disaster Issues in Non-Utilitarian Consequentialism (Ethics of Social Consequences)

• Authors: Vasil Gluchman
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The ethics of social consequences is a means of satisficing non-utilitarian consequentialism that can be used to approach disaster issues. The primary values in the ethics of social consequences are humanity, human dignity and moral rights, and these are developed and realized to achieve positive social consequences. The secondary values found in the ethics of social consequences include justice, responsibility, moral duty and tolerance. Their role and purpose is given by their ability to help achieve and realize moral good. Fair treatment within moral issues stems from applying primary as well as secondary values. The nature of these values cannot be determined exclusively in ordinary circumstances. However, in extraordinary circumstances (disasters), not all the requirements relating to the value structure of the ethics of social consequences need be considered in its entirety. In extraordinary circumstances, values are prioritised and realized. Primary values are realized prior to secondary ones. When prioritizing primary values, the realization of positive social consequences, or at least minimizing the negative social consequences, takes priority over other primary values. In disaster bioethics especially, it is often necessary to find a way to minimize the negative social consequences; thus, actions where positive social consequences are prevalent are preferred.

Keywords

EN

ethics of social consequences; bioethics; disaster

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Human Affairs
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 26
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 52-62

Dates

published

2016-01-01

online

2015-12-30

Contributors

author

Vasil Gluchman

• Institute of Ethics and Bioethics, Faculty of Arts, University of Prešov, 17 Novembra 1, SK-08078 Prešov, Slovakia

References

• Card, R. F. (2007). Inconsistency and the theoretical commitments of Hooker’s rule-consequentialism. Utilitas, 19(2), 243-258.[Crossref]
• Dubiel-Zielińska, P. (2013). “Ethics of Social Consequences” and “Ethics of Development” as theories belonging to stream of ethics of act. Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 3(3-4), 173-188.
• Dubiel-Zielińska, P. (2015). Teoria dopełnień. Pomiędzy neutylitarystycznym konsekwencjalizmem a personalizmem i perfekcjonizmem [Complementary theory: Among non-utilitarian consequentialism, personalism and perfectionism]. Rzeszów: RS Druk.
• Gluchman, V. (2003). Human being and morality in ethics of social consequences. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press.
• Gluchman, V. (2007). Human dignity and non-utilitarian consequentialist “Ethics of social consequences”. In The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy, Ethics (Vol. 1, pp. 159-165). Ankara: Philosophical Society of Turkey.
• Gluchman, M., & Kalajtzidis, J. (2014). Ethics of social consequences and issue of the principle of humanity in medical ethics. In 2nd Eurasian multidisciplinary forum, EMF 2014 (pp. 235-243). Tbilisi: ESI.
• Gluchmanová, M. (2013). The teacher as a moral agent: Humanity and human dignity in the teaching profession. In V. Gluchman (Ed.), Morality: Reasoning on different approaches (pp. 141-160). Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi.
• Gordijn, B., & Ten Have, H. (2015). Disaster ethics. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 18(1), 1-2.
• Grzybek, G. (2013). Etyka rozwoju a pedagogika opiekuńcza [Development ethics and protective pedagogy]. Rzeszów: UR.
• Hooker, B. (2002). Ideal code, real world, a rule-consequentialist theory of morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hugman, R. (2014). A-Z of professional ethics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Jesus, J. E., & Michael, G. E. (2009). Ethical considerations of research in disaster-stricken populations. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 24(2), 109-114.
• Kalajtzidis, J. (2014). Ethics of social consequences and the principle of maximization. In V. Gluchman (Ed.), Ethical thinking on past & present (pp. 26-31). Prešov: VPU.
• Kalajtzidis, J. (2013). Ethics of social consequences as a contemporary consequentialist theory. Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 3(3-4), 159-171.
• Lateef, F. (2011). Ethical issues in disasters. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 26(4), 289-292.
• Lešková Blahová, A. (2009). Possibilities of ethics of social consequences application in bioethics contexts. In V. Gluchman (Ed.), Bioethics in Central Europe: Methodology and Education (pp. 87-99). Prešov: FF PU.
• Luban, D. (2007). Professional ethics. In R. G. Frey & Ch. H. Wellman (Eds.), A companion to applied ethics (pp. 583-596). Malden, Oxford & Carlton: Blackwell.
• Mallia, P. (2015). Towards an ethical theory in disaster situations. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 18(1), 3-11.
• Misseri, L. (2014). Gluchman y su ética socio-consecuencialista. In V. Gluchman: Dignidad y consecuencias: ensayos de una ética socio-consecuencialista, 1a ed. (pp. 5-17). Mar del Plata: Kazak Ediciones.
• Petrini, C. (2010). Triage in public health emergencies: Ethical issues. Internal and Emergency Medicine, 5, 137-144.
• Sen, A. (1982). Rights and agency. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 11(1), 3-39.
• Sen, A. (1983). Evaluator relativity and consequential evaluation. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 12(2), 113-132.
• Sen, A. (1984). Resources, values and development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom. Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169-221.[Crossref]
• Sen, A. (1990). Justice: Means versus freedoms. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 19(2), 111-121.
• Sen, A. (1992). On ethics & economics. Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell.
• Sen, A. (1993). Utilitarianism and welfarism. In P. Pettit (Ed.), Consequentialism (pp. 15-41). Aldershot & Brookfield: Dartmount.
• Wall, E. (2009). Hooker’s consequentialism and the depth of moral experience. Dialogue, 48(2), 337-351. [Crossref]
• Zelnicek, P. (2002). Bio-ethical codes for physicians and medical staff for disaster medicine. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 17(supplement 2), p. 28.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/humaff-2016-0007