首页 > 最新文献

Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy最新文献

英文 中文
Google and the Cyber Infiltration b谷歌和网络渗透
Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.99
Xiaorong Li
Googles recent decision to withdraw its business from China in the wake of cyber censorship should lead other multinational corporations to recognize that ethical commitments should not be set aside for the purpose of market strategies.
谷歌(google)最近在中国遭遇网络审查后决定从中国撤出业务,这应该会让其他跨国公司认识到,不应为了市场战略的目的而放弃道德承诺。
{"title":"Google and the Cyber Infiltration","authors":"Xiaorong Li","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.99","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.99","url":null,"abstract":"Googles recent decision to withdraw its business from China in the wake of cyber censorship should lead other multinational corporations to recognize that ethical commitments should not be set aside for the purpose of market strategies.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"30 1","pages":"13-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66668766","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}
引用次数: 0
Philosophers to the Rescue? The Failed Attempt to Defend the Inclusion of Intelligent Design in Public Schools 哲学家来拯救?为公立学校纳入智能设计理论辩护的失败尝试
Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.102
Jay Sloan-Lynch
Philosophers have argued convincingly that Intelligent Design cannot simply be defined out of classrooms as nonscience. But the move from the conclusion that intelligent design is not nonscience to the conclusion that it is legitimate to teach it in public schools is deeply mistaken.
哲学家们令人信服地认为,智能设计不能简单地在课堂外被定义为非科学。但是,从“智能设计论并非非科学”的结论,到“在公立学校教授智能设计论是合法的”的结论,这种转变是大错特错的。
{"title":"Philosophers to the Rescue? The Failed Attempt to Defend the Inclusion of Intelligent Design in Public Schools","authors":"Jay Sloan-Lynch","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.302010.102","url":null,"abstract":"Philosophers have argued convincingly that Intelligent Design cannot simply be defined out of classrooms as nonscience. But the move from the conclusion that intelligent design is not nonscience to the conclusion that it is legitimate to teach it in public schools is deeply mistaken.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"30 1","pages":"18-23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66668818","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}
引用次数: 1
Constitutional Rights for Nonresident Aliens 非居民外国人的宪法权利
Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.103
A. Walen
I argue that nonresident aliens, in places that are clearly not U.S. territory, should benefit from constitutional rights. This is a matter of mutuality of obligation. The U.S. claims the authority to hold all people accountable for respecting certain laws, such as the law of war as defined in the Military Commissions Act. Accordingly, it must accord them basic legal rights in return. At the same time, I argue, contra Benjamin Wittes, that this would not lead to absurdly opening the courthouse doors, nor does it require abandoning principle to keep the flood of litigation reasonably contained. Not all harms inflicted by the U.S. government can give rise to a lawsuit, and that the distinction between those who should have a right to sue and those who should not can be drawn in a principled way.
我认为,在明显不属于美国领土的地方,非居民外国人应该受益于宪法权利。这是一个相互义务的问题。美国声称有权要求所有人遵守某些法律,例如《军事委员会法》中规定的战争法。因此,它必须给予他们基本的法律权利作为回报。与此同时,与本杰明·维茨(Benjamin Wittes)相反,我认为,这不会导致荒谬地打开法院的大门,也不需要放弃原则来合理地控制诉讼洪流。并不是美国政府造成的所有伤害都可以引起诉讼,谁有权起诉谁不应该起诉之间的区别可以用一种原则的方式来区分。
{"title":"Constitutional Rights for Nonresident Aliens","authors":"A. Walen","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.103","url":null,"abstract":"I argue that nonresident aliens, in places that are clearly not U.S. territory, should benefit from constitutional rights. This is a matter of mutuality of obligation. The U.S. claims the authority to hold all people accountable for respecting certain laws, such as the law of war as defined in the Military Commissions Act. Accordingly, it must accord them basic legal rights in return. At the same time, I argue, contra Benjamin Wittes, that this would not lead to absurdly opening the courthouse doors, nor does it require abandoning principle to keep the flood of litigation reasonably contained. Not all harms inflicted by the U.S. government can give rise to a lawsuit, and that the distinction between those who should have a right to sue and those who should not can be drawn in a principled way.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"2-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66666874","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}
引用次数: 0
The Harms of Homeschooling 在家上学的危害
Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.104
R. West
The benefits of homeschooling are now protected through legalization of the practice. Most of its harms could be prevented through its responsible regulation.
在家上学的好处现在通过这种做法的合法化得到了保护。它的大部分危害可以通过负责任的监管加以预防。
{"title":"The Harms of Homeschooling","authors":"R. West","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.104","url":null,"abstract":"The benefits of homeschooling are now protected through legalization of the practice. Most of its harms could be prevented through its responsible regulation.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"7-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66666987","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}
引用次数: 35
Insider Trading: A Moral Problem 内幕交易:一个道德问题
Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.105
A. Strudler
It turns out to be more difficult than one might think to identify the central moral wrong at the heart of this much publicized and vilified crime.
事实证明,要找出这种被大肆宣传和诽谤的罪行的核心道德错误,比人们想象的要困难得多。
{"title":"Insider Trading: A Moral Problem","authors":"A. Strudler","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.105","url":null,"abstract":"It turns out to be more difficult than one might think to identify the central moral wrong at the heart of this much publicized and vilified crime.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"12-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66667067","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}
引用次数: 1
Is There a Moral Obligation to Limit Family Size 限制家庭规模是道德义务吗
Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.108
Scott Wisor
Although we have an important obligation to protect the environment, people are not morally required to choose to have smaller families for environmental reasons.
虽然我们有保护环境的重要义务,但道德上并不要求人们出于环境原因选择小家庭。
{"title":"Is There a Moral Obligation to Limit Family Size","authors":"Scott Wisor","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.108","url":null,"abstract":"Although we have an important obligation to protect the environment, people are not morally required to choose to have smaller families for environmental reasons.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"26-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66668270","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}
引用次数: 3
Regulatory Review and Cost-Benefit Analysis 法规审查和成本效益分析
Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.107
M. Sagoff
In a Memorandum issued within a few days after he assumed office, President Barack Obama called for an overhaul of the policies the White House uses to review regulations proposed by federal departments and agencies. The president acknowledged the necessity of regulatory review "to ensure consistency with Presidential priorities, to coordinate regulatory policy, and to offer a dispassionate and analytical 'second opinion' on agency actions." Critics of previous administrations had charged that they misused the process of regulatory review to thwart agency actions. "In this time of fundamental transformation," the president wrote, "that process--and the principles governing regulation in general--should be revisited." Regulatory agencies have missions--but they must also consider the economic costs and consequences of what they do. This essay considers how the White House, in reviewing regulations, can direct agencies to take these costs and consequences into account while letting them do their work. Regulatory Review From the time of the Reagan administration, federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and departments, such as the Department of Labor and the Department of Agriculture, have had to obtain the approval of the White House before proposing any major regulation. Each year, the White House through its Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviews about 500 rulemakings. Those it approves may become law; those it rejects it "returns" to the agency. The Executive Order that currently governs regulatory review within OIRA requires every department and agency that proposes a regulation to "assess both the costs and the benefits of the intended regulation" and to "propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs." This requirement may seem innocuous; that agencies should balance the benefits and costs of a regulation appears to make common sense. Yet over the past 30 years, economists have developed a formal and technical method of defining and measuring "costs" and "benefits." Agencies must package regulatory proposals in a way that passes a cost-benefit test in the specific and technical sense that "costs" and "benefits" are now defined and measured within the theory of microeconomics. Within microeconomic theory, benefits are measured in terms of the amount people are willing to pay for outcomes they want. In economic parlance, "benefit" and "willingness to pay" (WTP) refer to the same thing. According to one authoritative text, "Benefits are the sums of the maximum amounts that people would be willing to pay to gain outcomes that they view as desirable." Costs are measured in terms of the minimum amounts people demand as compensation (or are willing to accept) to allow outcomes they do not like. "Willingness to accept" (WTA) is counted as a kind of negative WTP. Economists me
美国总统奥巴马(Barack Obama)在上任几天后发布的一份备忘录中,呼吁对白宫用来审查联邦部门和机构提出的法规的政策进行全面改革。总统承认监管审查的必要性,“以确保与总统的优先事项保持一致,协调监管政策,并就机构行动提供冷静和分析的‘第二意见’。”前几届政府的批评者指责他们滥用监管审查程序来阻挠机构的行动。“在这个根本性变革的时刻,”总统写道,“这个过程——以及总体上的监管原则——应该重新审视。”监管机构有自己的使命,但它们也必须考虑自己所做之事的经济成本和后果。本文考虑了白宫在审查法规时如何指导各机构在让它们开展工作的同时考虑到这些成本和后果。从里根政府时期开始,包括环境保护署(EPA)在内的联邦机构,以及劳工部和农业部等部门,在提出任何重大法规之前都必须获得白宫的批准。每年,白宫通过其管理和预算办公室(OMB)的信息和监管事务办公室(OIRA)审查大约500项规则制定。它批准的可以成为法律;那些被拒绝的将被“退回”给该机构。目前管理OIRA内部监管审查的行政命令要求每个提出监管建议的部门和机构“评估预期监管的成本和收益”,并且“只有在合理确定预期监管的收益证明其成本合理的情况下才提出或采用监管建议。”这个要求似乎是无害的;机构应该平衡监管的收益和成本,这似乎是常识。然而,在过去的30年里,经济学家已经发展出一种正式的技术方法来定义和衡量“成本”和“收益”。机构必须以一种能够通过成本效益测试的方式来包装监管提案,这种测试在具体和技术意义上说,“成本”和“效益”现在是在微观经济学理论中定义和衡量的。在微观经济学理论中,收益是根据人们愿意为他们想要的结果支付的金额来衡量的。在经济学术语中,“利益”和“支付意愿”(WTP)指的是同一件事。根据一篇权威文章,“利益是人们愿意为获得他们认为理想的结果而支付的最高金额的总和。”成本是根据人们要求作为补偿(或愿意接受)的最低金额来衡量的,以允许他们不喜欢的结果。“接受意愿”(WTA)被认为是一种消极的WTP。经济学家将一项政策的“净收益”衡量为受其影响的所有人的WTP(包括负WTA)的总和。经济理论规定,“采取所有具有净正效益的政策”,或者更一般地说,“选择净效益最大化的政策组合”。“评估预期监管的成本和收益”的指令并未邀请各机构讨论支持或反对一项政策的原因。没有人会反对这样的邀请。相反,该指令被解释为预设任何规则制定的原因,即最大化净收益。为了满足OIRA为监管批准设定的条件,一个机构必须从开始制定规则的时候就考虑净WTP。为了获得OIRA的批准,该机构还必须证明,没有其他监管能在收益和成本之间实现更好的平衡,因为这些都是在微观经济学理论的两个角落——WTP和WTA——内定义和衡量的。...
{"title":"Regulatory Review and Cost-Benefit Analysis","authors":"M. Sagoff","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.107","url":null,"abstract":"In a Memorandum issued within a few days after he assumed office, President Barack Obama called for an overhaul of the policies the White House uses to review regulations proposed by federal departments and agencies. The president acknowledged the necessity of regulatory review \"to ensure consistency with Presidential priorities, to coordinate regulatory policy, and to offer a dispassionate and analytical 'second opinion' on agency actions.\" Critics of previous administrations had charged that they misused the process of regulatory review to thwart agency actions. \"In this time of fundamental transformation,\" the president wrote, \"that process--and the principles governing regulation in general--should be revisited.\" Regulatory agencies have missions--but they must also consider the economic costs and consequences of what they do. This essay considers how the White House, in reviewing regulations, can direct agencies to take these costs and consequences into account while letting them do their work. Regulatory Review From the time of the Reagan administration, federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and departments, such as the Department of Labor and the Department of Agriculture, have had to obtain the approval of the White House before proposing any major regulation. Each year, the White House through its Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviews about 500 rulemakings. Those it approves may become law; those it rejects it \"returns\" to the agency. The Executive Order that currently governs regulatory review within OIRA requires every department and agency that proposes a regulation to \"assess both the costs and the benefits of the intended regulation\" and to \"propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs.\" This requirement may seem innocuous; that agencies should balance the benefits and costs of a regulation appears to make common sense. Yet over the past 30 years, economists have developed a formal and technical method of defining and measuring \"costs\" and \"benefits.\" Agencies must package regulatory proposals in a way that passes a cost-benefit test in the specific and technical sense that \"costs\" and \"benefits\" are now defined and measured within the theory of microeconomics. Within microeconomic theory, benefits are measured in terms of the amount people are willing to pay for outcomes they want. In economic parlance, \"benefit\" and \"willingness to pay\" (WTP) refer to the same thing. According to one authoritative text, \"Benefits are the sums of the maximum amounts that people would be willing to pay to gain outcomes that they view as desirable.\" Costs are measured in terms of the minimum amounts people demand as compensation (or are willing to accept) to allow outcomes they do not like. \"Willingness to accept\" (WTA) is counted as a kind of negative WTP. Economists me","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"21-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66667418","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}
引用次数: 5
What Is Charity 慈善是什么
Pub Date : 2009-06-22 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.106
J. Lichtenberg
Once revered as the greatest of the classic theological virtues, charity now has something of a bad rap. Can it be rehabilitated with help from the Jewish sage Maimonides?
慈善一度被尊为最伟大的经典神学美德,如今却有了一些坏名声。它能在犹太圣贤迈蒙尼德的帮助下恢复吗?
{"title":"What Is Charity","authors":"J. Lichtenberg","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.106","url":null,"abstract":"Once revered as the greatest of the classic theological virtues, charity now has something of a bad rap. Can it be rehabilitated with help from the Jewish sage Maimonides?","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"16-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66667234","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}
引用次数: 14
Recreating the Creation 再造创作
Pub Date : 2009-04-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.110
R. Nelson
{"title":"Recreating the Creation","authors":"R. Nelson","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.110","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.110","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"8-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66668601","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}
引用次数: 0
"Mental Illness" and Justice as Recognition “精神疾病”与正义的认同
Pub Date : 2009-01-01 DOI: 10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.111
S. Goering
My friend T was diagnosed with bipolar disorder over a decade ago, just in the midst of his medical residency. Since that time, he hasn't been able to complete his residency, though he's held a variety of different jobs, some of them making use of his medical knowledge (intake physician for insurance companies), others not (golf course attendant). Although T will grant that he needed help at the time of his diagnosis, to this day he doesn't approve of the kind of help he received (relatively coerced but officially "voluntary" commitment, a wide range of ineffective pharmaceutical cocktails, electroshock). Like many people diagnosed as bipolar, he has at various times come off the medications prescribed for him. In part this is due to frustration with their side effects (liver damage, weight gain, hair loss, mental fuzziness, anxiety) and their limited effectiveness. But it's also because he questions whether whatever occurred in his brain and resulted in his difficulty functioning "normally" is chronic, and in any case, he's not convinced that "normal" functioning is always to be preferred. In this judgment, he is echoed by many patients and former patients, both those relatively sanguine about psychiatry (Redfield Jamison) and those who identify with the more radical "psychiatric survivors' network." What he wants is to be respected for his abilities, accommodated for his illness (when it cannot be adequately treated), and treated as capable of making a positive social contribution. When many people hear T's story, they think, "What a sad story; what bad luck!" They understand it through a lens of personal tragedy and misfortune. If they sense unfairness, it is unfairness in an existential or perhaps even divine sense: how could the impersonal world or God treat him so poorly? The idea that some part--perhaps even a large part--of his disadvantage is socially imposed is foreign to them. Most people firmly believe in a medical model of disability, and by extension, a medical model of psychiatric disability. For them, disability is an intrinsic feature of a person, and the best way to help a disabled person is to find a cure. If a cure is not available, the person might be compensated for an inability to work, or pitied and offered charity. But according to my friend and people in the disability rights movement, many of his disadvantages could and indeed should be addressed through social change. If so, then we shouldn't shake our heads in pity over his case; we should wrestle with how to do justice for him. Sociopolitical Conception of Disability Disability scholars often distinguish between an impairment (usually taken to be a non-standard state of the body, such as deafness or paraplegia) and disability (understood to be a lack of fit between the body and the social environment, resulting in disadvantages for the individual who is impaired). With this distinction, the disadvantage of disability is something that calls out for social change. In
我的朋友T在十多年前被诊断出患有双相情感障碍,当时他正在做住院医生。从那时起,他就没能完成他的住院医生实习期,尽管他做过各种不同的工作,其中一些工作利用了他的医学知识(保险公司的接诊医生),另一些则没有(高尔夫球场服务员)。尽管T承认他在诊断时需要帮助,但直到今天他都不赞成他接受的那种帮助(相对强迫,但官方上是“自愿”的承诺,各种无效的药物鸡尾酒,电击)。像许多被诊断为双相情感障碍的人一样,他曾多次停止服用处方药物。部分原因是人们对它们的副作用(肝损伤、体重增加、脱发、精神模糊、焦虑)和有限的疗效感到沮丧。但也因为他质疑大脑中发生的事情,导致他难以“正常”运作,这是否是慢性的,无论如何,他不相信“正常”运作总是被优先考虑的。在这一判断中,他得到了许多病人和前病人的赞同,包括那些对精神病学相对乐观的人(雷德菲尔德·贾米森)和那些认同更激进的“精神病学幸存者网络”的人。他想要的是尊重他的能力,照顾他的疾病(当疾病无法得到充分治疗时),并将他视为能够对社会做出积极贡献的人。当许多人听到T的故事时,他们认为,“多么悲伤的故事;真倒霉!”他们通过个人的悲剧和不幸来理解它。如果他们感觉到了不公平,那是一种存在主义的不公平,甚至是一种神圣的不公平:这个没有人情味的世界或上帝怎么能如此糟糕地对待他?他的某些劣势——甚至可能是很大一部分劣势——是社会强加给他们的,这种想法对他们来说是陌生的。大多数人坚定地相信残疾的医学模型,延伸开来,精神残疾的医学模型。对他们来说,残疾是一个人的内在特征,帮助残疾人的最好方法就是找到治疗方法。如果无法治愈,可能会对无法工作的人进行补偿,或者给予同情和慈善。但在我的朋友和残疾人权利运动人士看来,他的许多缺点可以而且确实应该通过社会变革来解决。如果是这样,那么我们就不应该对他的情况摇头同情;我们应该考虑如何公正地对待他。残障学者经常区分残障(通常被认为是身体的一种非标准状态,如耳聋或截瘫)和残障(被理解为身体与社会环境不相适应,导致残障个体处于不利地位)。有了这个区别,残疾的缺点就需要社会变革。在许多情况下,有缺陷的人不愿意改变他们的身体(如聋人不希望植入耳蜗),或者只是面临着没有已知的药物治疗他们的缺陷(例如,脊髓损伤导致瘫痪,无法“固定”)。残疾人权利运动强调,这些人应该得到公平的工作机会,并参与社会生活的各个方面,即使他们的运作模式是非标准的。事实上,它庆祝了生活方式的多样性,并试图帮助非残疾公众重新思考残疾的概念。残障和残疾的区别有一个问题,那就是在与那些认为残疾是身体固有的人讨论时,它会造成术语上的混淆。一个后果是,当许多人认识到某些损伤显然会导致身体上的不利时,如果残疾的社会政治模型总是坚持社会变革而不是身体治疗,那么它可能会显得被夸大。...
{"title":"\"Mental Illness\" and Justice as Recognition","authors":"S. Goering","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.111","url":null,"abstract":"My friend T was diagnosed with bipolar disorder over a decade ago, just in the midst of his medical residency. Since that time, he hasn't been able to complete his residency, though he's held a variety of different jobs, some of them making use of his medical knowledge (intake physician for insurance companies), others not (golf course attendant). Although T will grant that he needed help at the time of his diagnosis, to this day he doesn't approve of the kind of help he received (relatively coerced but officially \"voluntary\" commitment, a wide range of ineffective pharmaceutical cocktails, electroshock). Like many people diagnosed as bipolar, he has at various times come off the medications prescribed for him. In part this is due to frustration with their side effects (liver damage, weight gain, hair loss, mental fuzziness, anxiety) and their limited effectiveness. But it's also because he questions whether whatever occurred in his brain and resulted in his difficulty functioning \"normally\" is chronic, and in any case, he's not convinced that \"normal\" functioning is always to be preferred. In this judgment, he is echoed by many patients and former patients, both those relatively sanguine about psychiatry (Redfield Jamison) and those who identify with the more radical \"psychiatric survivors' network.\" What he wants is to be respected for his abilities, accommodated for his illness (when it cannot be adequately treated), and treated as capable of making a positive social contribution. When many people hear T's story, they think, \"What a sad story; what bad luck!\" They understand it through a lens of personal tragedy and misfortune. If they sense unfairness, it is unfairness in an existential or perhaps even divine sense: how could the impersonal world or God treat him so poorly? The idea that some part--perhaps even a large part--of his disadvantage is socially imposed is foreign to them. Most people firmly believe in a medical model of disability, and by extension, a medical model of psychiatric disability. For them, disability is an intrinsic feature of a person, and the best way to help a disabled person is to find a cure. If a cure is not available, the person might be compensated for an inability to work, or pitied and offered charity. But according to my friend and people in the disability rights movement, many of his disadvantages could and indeed should be addressed through social change. If so, then we shouldn't shake our heads in pity over his case; we should wrestle with how to do justice for him. Sociopolitical Conception of Disability Disability scholars often distinguish between an impairment (usually taken to be a non-standard state of the body, such as deafness or paraplegia) and disability (understood to be a lack of fit between the body and the social environment, resulting in disadvantages for the individual who is impaired). With this distinction, the disadvantage of disability is something that calls out for social change. In ","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"14-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66668156","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}
引用次数: 3
期刊
Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1