This article presents the current discussion around the terms “medical futility” and “persistent therapy” and their definitions. This discussion is based on the dis-pute of whether the term “persistent therapy” should be rejected and replaced with the term “medical futility” in Polish bioethical and medical regulations.The dispute started after the Polish Working Group on End-of-Life Ethics (PWG) had published its definition of persistent therapy in 2008. To settle the dispute, the author proposes amodified version of the PWG’s definition of persistent therapy that combines persis-tence and futility. He argues that persistent therapy is the application of extraordinary or causally inefficacious medical procedures to sustain the life of aterminally ill patient. He also asserts that medical futility can be useful for bioethics only when its definition is limited to medical factors.
{"title":"Medical Futility or Persistent Therapy? A Dispute over the Terms and Definitions in the Polish Context","authors":"M. Ferdynus","doi":"10.18276/AIE.2021.53-03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/AIE.2021.53-03","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents the current discussion around the terms “medical futility” and “persistent therapy” and their definitions. This discussion is based on the dis-pute of whether the term “persistent therapy” should be rejected and replaced with the term “medical futility” in Polish bioethical and medical regulations.The dispute started after the Polish Working Group on End-of-Life Ethics (PWG) had published its definition of persistent therapy in 2008. To settle the dispute, the author proposes amodified version of the PWG’s definition of persistent therapy that combines persis-tence and futility. He argues that persistent therapy is the application of extraordinary or causally inefficacious medical procedures to sustain the life of aterminally ill patient. He also asserts that medical futility can be useful for bioethics only when its definition is limited to medical factors.","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67978967","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Review of W.K. Gródek's book \"Jedno, wiele, nic u Zenona i Gorgiasza. Analiza terminów ἕν, πολλά, οὐδέν w kontekście teorii Parmenidesa:, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jana Pawła II, 2018","authors":"A. Pacewicz","doi":"10.18276/aie.2021.53-06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2021.53-06","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67979997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The aim of my paper is to describe and evaluate different conceptions of holism in Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. I distinguish three readings of holistic elements in this work: i) Minimal Holism (E. Anscombe, M. Black, D. Pears); ii) Moderate Holism (J. Conant, C. Diamond, G. Ryle); and iii) Radical Holism (G. Bar-Elli, M. Kremer, P. Livingston). The conclusion is that the most viable option is Moderate Holism since it embraces the logico-syntactical notion of use, rejects an anachronistic interpretation of Tractatarian ontology and allows us to see that the holistic elements are complementary to the initial atomism of the work. Moreover, I point to the consequences of the topic for the overall reading of Wittgenstein’s early and late work.
本文的目的是描述和评价维特根斯坦的《逻辑哲学论》中关于整体论的不同概念。我在这部作品中区分了三种整体元素的解读:I)最小整体主义(E. Anscombe, M. Black, D. Pears);ii)适度整体论(J. Conant, C. Diamond, G. Ryle);激进整体主义(G. Bar-Elli, M. Kremer, P. Livingston)。结论是，最可行的选择是适度整体主义，因为它包含了使用的逻辑句法概念，拒绝了对理论本体论的不合时宜的解释，并允许我们看到整体元素是对工作的初始原子论的补充。此外，我指出了这个话题对维特根斯坦早期和晚期作品的整体阅读的影响。
{"title":"Holism and Atomism in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus","authors":"Krystian Bogucki","doi":"10.18276/aie.2021.55-02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2021.55-02","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of my paper is to describe and evaluate different conceptions of holism in Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. I distinguish three readings of holistic elements in this work: i) Minimal Holism (E. Anscombe, M. Black, D. Pears); ii) Moderate Holism (J. Conant, C. Diamond, G. Ryle); and iii) Radical Holism (G. Bar-Elli, M. Kremer, P. Livingston). The conclusion is that the most viable option is Moderate Holism since it embraces the logico-syntactical notion of use, rejects an anachronistic interpretation of Tractatarian ontology and allows us to see that the holistic elements are complementary to the initial atomism of the work. Moreover, I point to the consequences of the topic for the overall reading of Wittgenstein’s early and late work.","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67980304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 1931, when writing about those who had inspired him, Wittgenstein singled out Boltzmann; nobody seems to know why, however. Most commentators have ignored this remark, while a few have tried to guess what the inspiration might have
{"title":"How Could Boltzmann Have Inspired the Early Wittgenstein?","authors":"W. Sady","doi":"10.18276/aie.2021.55-04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2021.55-04","url":null,"abstract":"In 1931, when writing about those who had inspired him, Wittgenstein singled out Boltzmann; nobody seems to know why, however. Most commentators have ignored this remark, while a few have tried to guess what the inspiration might have","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67979902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Congenital aphantasia, or the complete absence of mental imagery, is a topic that has recently aroused the interest of researchers in many fields including philosophy, psychology and cognitive sciences. While it is generally supposed that we all have rich mental lives full of imaged representations, estimates suggest 2-3% of the population may have never formed an image or seen ‘in the mind’s eye.’ This paper aims to address the scepticism surrounding aphantasia, the challenges in communicating about mental imagery, and the research methods used in cognitive sciences today through the lens of Wittgenstein’s philosophy. The paper argues that 1) communicating about mental imagery involves language games that persons with aphantasia may not be able to play (i.e., makes reference to expressions and concepts that are meaningless for them, such as ‘visualise,’ ‘form an image,’ etc.); 2) that as a consequence aphantasia, in present research, is only describable negatively (as lack or incapacity); 3) that rather than a cognitive or a psychological issue, aphantasia should be understood as a grammatical one; and 4) that we need to invent new language games in order to come to a better understanding of conditions such as aphantasia, and to be able to appreciate the rich diversity and variability of human experience.
{"title":"Aphantasia and the Language of Imagination: A Wittgensteinian Exploration","authors":"Mélissa Fox-Muraton","doi":"10.18276/aie.2021.55-01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2021.55-01","url":null,"abstract":"Congenital aphantasia, or the complete absence of mental imagery, is a topic that has recently aroused the interest of researchers in many fields including philosophy, psychology and cognitive sciences. While it is generally supposed that we all have rich mental lives full of imaged representations, estimates suggest 2-3% of the population may have never formed an image or seen ‘in the mind’s eye.’ This paper aims to address the scepticism surrounding aphantasia, the challenges in communicating about mental imagery, and the research methods used in cognitive sciences today through the lens of Wittgenstein’s philosophy. The paper argues that 1) communicating about mental imagery involves language games that persons with aphantasia may not be able to play (i.e., makes reference to expressions and concepts that are meaningless for them, such as ‘visualise,’ ‘form an image,’ etc.); 2) that as a consequence aphantasia, in present research, is only describable negatively (as lack or incapacity); 3) that rather than a cognitive or a psychological issue, aphantasia should be understood as a grammatical one; and 4) that we need to invent new language games in order to come to a better understanding of conditions such as aphantasia, and to be able to appreciate the rich diversity and variability of human experience.","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67980065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The neo-Kantian, deontological liberal theory seeks to overcome the paradoxes of tolerance. It claims to accomplish this task by grounding tolerance in purportedly universal higher-order moral reasoning. I argue that in reality, such an approach cannot separate tolerance from particular ethical norms or empirical realities. For this reason, it cannot resolve the paradoxes of tolerance. However, I contend there is another path to account for the value of tolerating “others”. Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction provides us the way to retain the necessarily particularistic character of tolerance, without forfeiting its context-transcending, “universalistic” potential. In this article, I show that the paradoxes of tolerance need to be maintained as quasi-transcendental structures, instead of being discarded in the name of higher-order moral reasoning.
{"title":"The Paradoxes of Tolerance: A Deconstructive View","authors":"Giorgi Tskhadaia","doi":"10.18276/AIE.2021.53-02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/AIE.2021.53-02","url":null,"abstract":"The neo-Kantian, deontological liberal theory seeks to overcome the paradoxes of tolerance. It claims to accomplish this task by grounding tolerance in purportedly universal higher-order moral reasoning. I argue that in reality, such an approach cannot separate tolerance from particular ethical norms or empirical realities. For this reason, it cannot resolve the paradoxes of tolerance. However, I contend there is another path to account for the value of tolerating “others”. Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction provides us the way to retain the necessarily particularistic character of tolerance, without forfeiting its context-transcending, “universalistic” potential. In this article, I show that the paradoxes of tolerance need to be maintained as quasi-transcendental structures, instead of being discarded in the name of higher-order moral reasoning.","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67978961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Philosophical Concept of Human on the Basis of Posthumanism","authors":"A. Krupa","doi":"10.18276/aie.2021.56-04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2021.56-04","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67980217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Conception of Posthumous Harm – Is It Worth of Sustain?","authors":"Olga Dryla","doi":"10.18276/aie.2021.53-04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2021.53-04","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67978973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
M. Michałowska, Łukasz Kowalczyk, W. Marcinkowska, Mikołaj Malicki
Recent advancements in new neural technologies raise bioethical concerns over personal autonomy, which they potentially threaten to diminish or entirely eliminate. Although caution in the application of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and braincomputer interfaces (BCIs) is explicitly urged in almost every study, the debate features a definitional void as to what notion of autonomy is actually adopted by the authors. The focus on autonomy has dominated the debate to such an extent that other essential values seem to be disappearing from the bioethical horizon, becoming less valued, less important, and less visible. This paper examines the autonomy-problem by probing whether DBS and BCIs indeed threaten personal autonomy. The impact of DBS and BCIs is studied on the examples of several illnesses, whereby the well-being of a person and the importance of informed consent are taken into account to assess the influence of these novel medical technologies on autonomy.
{"title":"Being Outside the Decision-Loop: The Impact of Deep Brain Stimulation and Brain-Computer Interfaces on Autonomy","authors":"M. Michałowska, Łukasz Kowalczyk, W. Marcinkowska, Mikołaj Malicki","doi":"10.18276/aie.2021.56-02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2021.56-02","url":null,"abstract":"Recent advancements in new neural technologies raise bioethical concerns over personal autonomy, which they potentially threaten to diminish or entirely eliminate. Although caution in the application of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and braincomputer interfaces (BCIs) is explicitly urged in almost every study, the debate features a definitional void as to what notion of autonomy is actually adopted by the authors. The focus on autonomy has dominated the debate to such an extent that other essential values seem to be disappearing from the bioethical horizon, becoming less valued, less important, and less visible. This paper examines the autonomy-problem by probing whether DBS and BCIs indeed threaten personal autonomy. The impact of DBS and BCIs is studied on the examples of several illnesses, whereby the well-being of a person and the importance of informed consent are taken into account to assess the influence of these novel medical technologies on autonomy.","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67980028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：