-
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics Jun 2022The ongoing debate about moral bioenhancement (MBE) has been exceptionally stimulating, but it is defined by extreme polarization and lack of consensus about any... (Review)
Review
The ongoing debate about moral bioenhancement (MBE) has been exceptionally stimulating, but it is defined by extreme polarization and lack of consensus about any relevant aspect of MBE. This article reviews the discussion on MBE, showing that a lack of consensus about enhancements' desirable features and the constant development of the debate calls for a more rigorous ethical analysis. I identify a list of factors that may be of crucial importance for illuminating the matters of moral permissibility in the MBE debate and which could help us move beyond the current lack of consensus. More precisely, I propose three important theoretical and normative standards that MBE should satisfy if we wish to mitigate the concerns about its utter impermissibility. Systematically assessing MBE interventions across the presented categories should provide valuable conclusions about its theoretical soundness and feasibility, its compatibility with fundamental moral norms, and its compatibility with or facilitation of socio-political goals of equality and justice.
Topics: Biomedical Enhancement; Ethical Analysis; Humans; Morals
PubMed: 35871717
DOI: 10.1007/s11017-022-09584-1 -
Tijdschrift Voor Psychiatrie 2021Moral courage is the courage to do what you morally believe to be right, despite the presence of danger. Courage is certainly important in critical situations where... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Moral courage is the courage to do what you morally believe to be right, despite the presence of danger. Courage is certainly important in critical situations where moral values are at stake. Reflection is not enough, you have to act wisely. Moral courage bridges the gap between thinking and doing. This article first characterizes moral courage and then provides tools that can help psychiatrists to show moral courage.
AIM
To provide tools that can help psychiatrists in their professional practice to show moral courage.
METHOD
Characterizing moral courage on the basis of a case study and literature review.
RESULTS
Psychiatrists can learn courage by preparing for the dangers inherent in the job, by thinking about situations in advance, and going through and practicing possible scenarios and consequences. They can also discuss the subject in peer-to-peer meetings.
CONCLUSION
Courage is certainly important in critical situations where moral values are at stake. Reflection is then not enough, and one must act wisely. Moral courage bridges the gap between thinking and doing. Professionals are assisted in this when (professional) organizations invest in a safe and stimulating context.
Topics: Courage; Ethics, Nursing; Humans; Learning; Morals; Psychiatry
PubMed: 34757608
DOI: No ID Found -
Scientific Reports May 2023The study of moral judgement and decision making examines the way predictions made by moral and ethical theories fare in real world settings. Such investigations are...
The study of moral judgement and decision making examines the way predictions made by moral and ethical theories fare in real world settings. Such investigations are carried out using a variety of approaches and methods, such as experiments, modeling, and observational and field studies, in a variety of populations. The current Collection on moral judgments and decision making includes works that represent this variety, while focusing on some common themes, including group morality and the role of affect in moral judgment. The Collection also includes a significant number of studies that made theoretically driven predictions and failed to find support for them. We highlight the importance of such null-results papers, especially in fields that are traditionally governed by theoretical frameworks.
Topics: Negative Results; Judgment; Morals; Decision Making
PubMed: 37169894
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-34899-x -
Personality and Social Psychology... Aug 2023The idea of "purity" transformed moral psychology. Here, we provide the first systematic review of this concept. Although often discussed as one construct, we reveal ~9... (Review)
Review
ACADEMIC ABSTRACT
The idea of "purity" transformed moral psychology. Here, we provide the first systematic review of this concept. Although often discussed as one construct, we reveal ~9 understandings of purity, ranging from respecting God to not eating gross things. This striking heterogeneity arises because purity-unlike other moral constructs-is not understood by what it but what it : obvious interpersonal harm. This poses many problems for moral psychology and explains why purity lacks convergent and divergent validity and why purity is confounded with politics, religion, weirdness, and perceived harm. Because purity is not a coherent construct, it cannot be a distinct basis of moral judgment or specially tied to disgust. Rather than a specific moral domain, purity is best understood as a loose set of themes in moral rhetoric. These themes are scaffolded on cultural understandings of harm-the broad, pluralistic harm outlined by the Theory of Dyadic Morality.
PUBLIC ABSTRACT
People are fascinated by morality-how do people make moral judgments and why do liberals and conservatives seem to frequently disagree? "Purity" is one moral concept often discussed when talking about morality-it has been suggested to capture moral differences across politics and to demonstrate the evolutionary roots of morality, especially the role of disgust in moral judgment. However, despite the many books and articles that mention purity, there is no systematic analysis of purity. Here, we review all existing academic articles focused on purity in morality. We find that purity is an especially messy concept that lacks scientific validity. Because it is so poorly defined and inconsistently measured, it should not be invoked to explain our moral minds or political differences.
Topics: Humans; Morals; Judgment; Disgust; Politics; Religion
PubMed: 36314693
DOI: 10.1177/10888683221124741 -
Fertility and Sterility Feb 2022
Topics: Humans; Infertility; Morale; Specialization
PubMed: 34980432
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.11.036 -
BMC Public Health Jul 2020The job morale of healthcare staff is widely seen as an important factor for the quality of care. Yet, there are different understandings of what constitutes job morale,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The job morale of healthcare staff is widely seen as an important factor for the quality of care. Yet, there are different understandings of what constitutes job morale, which hinders systematic research and comparisons. We therefore conducted a scoping review of how the concept of job morale has developed over time and how it is used in healthcare research.
METHODS
A scoping review was conducted to identify relevant literature. Data were gathered on study design and context, objectives, definitions of morale, outcome measures and key findings. Data was synthesised using a descriptive analytical framework.
RESULTS
Ninety-three unique studies met eligibility criteria for the present review. The literature outlines four main periods of the evolution of the concept of job morale: The First World War and the interwar years; Second World War; Aftermath of the Second World War; and Contemporary period. The concept of job morale originated in a military context and was later applied to and specified in the healthcare literature. The concept has been applied to individuals and groups. The understandings used in healthcare vary, but overlap. Methods for assessing job morale in healthcare include quantitative scales, indirect measurements of consequences and predictors of morale, and qualitative approaches. Existing studies have mainly focused on the job morale of general practitioners, nurses and mental health professionals in high-income countries.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the understandings of job morale in healthcare are heterogeneous and inconsistent, the concept appears to have been useful over longer periods of time and in different contexts. Which precise understanding of job morale is useful, depends on the given research purpose, and studies should make explicit which exact understanding they apply. Systematic research on job morale is required to facilitate measures to improve and maintain high levels of morale across different professional groups, including professionals in low- and middle-income countries.
Topics: Concept Formation; Delivery of Health Care; Female; Health Personnel; Health Services Research; Humans; Job Satisfaction; Male; Morale
PubMed: 32711485
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09256-6 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2022Science and scientists are among the key drivers of societal progress and technological developments. While research has demonstrated that science is perceived as...
Science and scientists are among the key drivers of societal progress and technological developments. While research has demonstrated that science is perceived as heterogeneous, work on perceptions of scientists usually considers "scientists" as members of a homogeneous group. In the present research, we went beyond this general categorization by investigating differences in social evaluations of different types of scientists. Across four studies conducted in the UK and the US (total N = 1441), we discovered that members of the most frequently mentioned scientific occupations (35 and 36 respectively in each country) are seen as highly competent, relatively moral, but only moderately sociable. We also found that individuals perceive differences between scientific occupations across social dimensions, which were captured in clusters of scientific occupations. Chemists, biologists, and physicists represented the most mentioned and highly prototypical scientific occupations. Perceived prototypicality was primarily associated with competence ratings, meaning that, in the public's view, to be a scientist means to be competent. Perceptions of morality and sociability varied notably across clusters. Overall, we demonstrate that focusing only on "scientists" leads to overgeneralization, and that distinguishing between different types of scientists provides a much-needed nuanced picture of social evaluations of scientists across occupations.
Topics: Humans; Occupations; Morals
PubMed: 36316377
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-23197-7 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Sep 2023
Topics: Humans; Stress, Psychological; Emotions; Morals
PubMed: 37303214
DOI: 10.21037/apm-23-320 -
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics Apr 2023It is argued that the emergence of controversial views in discussions of theoretical medicine and bioethics is best explained by the assumption of moral realism within...
It is argued that the emergence of controversial views in discussions of theoretical medicine and bioethics is best explained by the assumption of moral realism within those discursive practices. Neither of the main alternatives of realism in contemporary meta-ethics - moral expressivism and anti-realism - can account for the rise of controversies in the bioethical debate. This argument draws from the contemporary expressivist or anti-representationalist pragmatism as advanced by Richard Rorty and Huw Price, as well as the pragmatist scientific realism and fallibilism of the founder of pragmatism, Charles S. Peirce. In accordance with the fallibilist view, it is proposed that presenting controversial positions may serve epistemic purposes within bioethical debates, providing opportunities for inquiry by pointing towards problems to be solved and arguments and evidence for and against to be put forward.
Topics: Humans; Morals; Bioethics; Dissent and Disputes
PubMed: 36867309
DOI: 10.1007/s11017-023-09616-4 -
Annual Review of Psychology Jan 2024Moral psychology was shaped around three categories of agents and patients: humans, other animals, and supernatural beings. Rapid progress in artificial intelligence has... (Review)
Review
Moral psychology was shaped around three categories of agents and patients: humans, other animals, and supernatural beings. Rapid progress in artificial intelligence has introduced a fourth category for our moral psychology to deal with: intelligent machines. Machines can perform as moral agents, making decisions that affect the outcomes of human patients or solving moral dilemmas without human supervision. Machines can be perceived as moral patients, whose outcomes can be affected by human decisions, with important consequences for human-machine cooperation. Machines can be moral proxies that human agents and patients send as their delegates to moral interactions or use as a disguise in these interactions. Here we review the experimental literature on machines as moral agents, moral patients, and moral proxies, with a focus on recent findings and the open questions that they suggest.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Morals; Intelligence
PubMed: 37722750
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-030123-113559