Justifying Positive Appeals to Conscience: The Debate We Can’t Avoid

Daniel J. Miller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2021.1940356

2021-07-27

The American Journal of Bioethics

Abstract:I am especially grateful to Kyle Fritz for charitable feedback on multiple earlier versions of this paper. I am also grateful to Brian Eltomi for thoughtful conversations that were integral to formulating the argument presented here.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Merits and Limits of Conscience-Based Legal Exemptions

Jocelyn Maclure

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-020-09553-6

2020-10-21

Criminal Law and Philosophy

Abstract:Exemption claims remain a tangled and divisive moral and legal issue both in academia and in the public sphere. In his book Exemptions: Necessary, Justified, or Misguided?, the constitutional scholar Kent Greenawalt zeros in on the vexed question of whether exemptions from rules of general applicability based on the conscientious convictions of individuals or groups are sometimes justified or prudent by discussing a wide range of cases drawn from the American jurisprudence. Although he does not engage in a significant way with political and legal philosophy and comparative law, his contextualist and pragmatic approach is a powerful antidote against oversimplification and dogmatism with regard to exemption claims. Unsurprisingly, Greenawalt's approach comes at times dangerously close to casuistry, and some of his analyses and normative recommendations would benefit from a firmer footing in moral principles and rational argumentation. In this review, I flesh out some of the strengths and limits of Greenawalt's valuable book.
The Reasonable Content of Conscience in Public Bioethics

Abram Brummett,Jason Eberl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180124000070

2024-03-13

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Abstract:Bioethicists aim to provide moral guidance in policy, research, and clinical contexts using methods of moral analysis (e.g., principlism, casuistry, and narrative ethics) that aim to satisfy the constraints of public reason. Among other objections, some critics have argued that public reason lacks the moral content needed to resolve bioethical controversies because discursive reason simply cannot justify any substantive moral claims in a pluralistic society. In this paper, the authors defend public reason from this criticism by showing that it contains sufficient content to address one of the perennial controversies in bioethics—the permissibility and limits of clinician conscientious objection. They develop a "reasonability view" grounded in public reason and apply it to some recent examples of conscientious objection.

social sciences, biomedical,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
The Balanced View of the Value of Conscience

Doug McConnell,Julian Savulescu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12655

Abstract:On the mainstream view, consciences are valuable because they promote moral unity. However, conscience, so defined, will systematically prevent moral growth that threatens unity, even when unity has formed around oppressive moral values. This motivates Carolyn McLeod's alternative 'Dynamic View' whereby consciences are valuable to the extent that they are dynamic. Consciences are dynamic when they interact with our best moral judgements to shape or 'retool' the moral values underpinning conscience, sometimes at an initial cost to unity. We modify and extend McLeod's account in two ways: (1) We object to her claim that conscience encourages its own retooling. We argue that the opposite is true - conscience creates a motivational barrier to change that moral judgement must overcome to successfully retool conscience. The task of ensuring dynamism, therefore, falls to moral judgement. (2) However, this motivational barrier enables conscience to play a valuable role that McLeod overlooks - compensating for the limitations of moral judgement. On our Balanced View, the value of conscience depends on it being sufficiently open to being shaped by our best moral judgements but inert enough to compensate for distorted moral judgements and to guide action when under cognitive load.
Harmonizing conscience claims and patient access to assisted death

Eric Wasylenko

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08404704231158701

Abstract:The rights of patients to receive legally permissible interventions sometimes conflict with enshrined rights of providers to object, for reasons of conscience, to providing those interventions. Getting the balance right is challenging. But reasonable balance to manage these conflicting imperatives can be achieved in the design of programs for assisted death. Rather than limiting the discourse to the platform of competing individual rights, health leaders are urged to consider the broader societal benefits and impacts of valuing conscience in the practice of medicine, the creation of regulation and policy, and the delivery of healthcare. A method to determine that conscience claims are "genuine," "reasonable," and "acceptable" needs developing. A list of criteria toward this determination is offered.
Toward social responsibility, not the social responsibility semblance: marketing does not need a conscience

Gaski, John F.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-022-00227-1

2022-06-10

Academy of Marketing Science Review

Abstract:For decades, much leading marketing and business ethics literature has insisted that marketers accept a social responsibility or heed a social conscience beyond the practice of profitable customer satisfaction. Professional observers apparently feel that the traditional institution of marketing generally falls short of optimal contribution to societal welfare. The following essay challenges that fashionable posture by suggesting how such criticism is misdirected. Argued is that the socially responsible marketing "conscience" orientation is naïve, superfluous, incoherent, and ultimately dysfunctional for its intended beneficiaries. This contrarian position is not entirely new, as readers will recognize, yet has been incessantly resisted in the academic and philosophical marketplace for ideas—i.e., has not enjoyed widespread scholarly adoption or market penetration. Perhaps this outcome accrues not from the idea-product itself but from its poor representation or deficient marketing. Therefore, this paper attempts to mitigate any such impediments, especially the packaging, positioning, and communication elements. The revised expository approach involves, in particular, decomposing the established social responsibility construct to spotlight its flawed nature. A possible intersection with conventional marketing ethics is also addressed, and an inventory of potential counterarguments to the paper's view is developed and dispatched.
A Model of Justification

Sarah Ridout

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.06844

2020-03-15

Abstract:I consider decision-making constrained by considerations of morality, rationality, or other virtues. The decision maker (DM) has a true preference over outcomes, but feels compelled to choose among outcomes that are top-ranked by some preference that he considers "justifiable." This model unites a broad class of empirical work on distributional preferences, charitable donations, prejudice/discrimination, and corruption/bribery. I provide a behavioral characterization of the model. I also show that the set of justifications can be identified from choice behavior when the true preference is known, and that choice behavior substantially restricts both the true preference and justifications when neither is known. I argue that the justifiability model represents an advancement over existing models of rationalization because the structure it places on possible "rationales" improves tractability, interpretation and identification.

Theoretical Economics
Disclaiming, Mitigating, and Character Boosting—How Targets of Investigate Journalism Negotiate Guilt, Excuses, Justification, and Morality

Magnus Danielson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2023.2173954

IF: 3.604

2023-02-04

Journalism Studies

Abstract:This article analyses how objects of investigative journalism challenge journalistic authority and knowledge production from the textual space of their own platforms. Drawing on theories of image repair discourse, legal defense strategies, and socio-moral meaning making, a thematic analysis is used to research how the defenses criticize the investigations, what type of dialogical socio-moral meaning making they initiate, and what challenges that meaning-making poses to journalism. The article identifies three positions vis-à-vis the accusations: disclaiming, mitigating, and character boosting. The positions represent journalism respectively as either malevolent adversary, legitimate censor, or associate moral champion, and the stances criticize investigations for being either wrongful, exaggerated, or a distortion of character. The defenses challenge investigative journalism to substantiate accusations, justify methods, renegotiate guilt, acknowledge the validity of excuses and justification, and give credit for alleged moral qualities. The study ends with a discussion on the importance for journalism to engage seriously with defenses to uphold its role as a just and fair institution of accountability, and as a relevant actor in the construction of societal moral.

communication
Is Conscience Best Understood as a Particular Form of Consciousness? Theological and Ethical Reflections Inspired by the Phenomenology of Maurice Merleau-Ponty

Martin McKeever

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010010

2022-12-23

Religions

Abstract:Since its emergence after the Council of Trent, moral theology as a discipline has had an intimate but problematical relationship with philosophy. It is not rare, even today, to hear or read moral theologians expounding their views with no explicit acknowledgement of the importance of the philosophical terms and theories they use in the formulation of their positions. All this would seem to be particularly the case with a term that has gradually become quite central to moral theological discourse: conscience. The purpose of this article is to suggest that phenomenology, as a relatively new and profoundly revolutionary branch of philosophy, has become an indispensable resource for moral theological reflection on conscience. In particular it will be argued that the thought of Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908–1961) constitutes a profound -unintentional- critique of traditional conceptions of conscience and simply cannot be ignored (as it normally is!) in contemporary discussions of this theme. What follows, then, divides into four sections: the first on a traditional vision of conscience, the second on consciousness in the thought of Merleau-Ponty; the third on conscience as a form of consciousness; and the fourth on the potential contribution of this line of thought to ethics and fundamental moral theology.
Refusals and Requests: In Defense of Consistency

Jeremy Davis,Eric Mathison

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180124000148

2024-03-20

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Abstract:Physicians place significant weight on the distinction between acts and omissions. Most believe that autonomous refusals for procedures, such as blood transfusions and resuscitation, ought to be respected, but they feel no similar obligation to accede to requests for treatment that will, in the physician's opinion, harm the patient (e.g., assisted death). Thus, there is an asymmetry. In this paper, we challenge the strength of this distinction by arguing that the ordering of values should be the same in both cases. The reason for respecting refusals is that, in such cases, autonomy outweighs well-being. We argue that the same should be true in request cases, which means that requests should not be denied only due to the treatment being too harmful in the physician's opinion. Our strategy is to consider and reject a number of arguments for the asymmetrical view, including an appeal to the doing–allowing distinction and positive and negative rights. The duty to respect refusals is still greater than the duty to grant requests on our view, but, by arguing that the ordering of values is the same in both cases, we show that there is less of a distinction in healthcare between requests and refusals than many currently believe.

social sciences, biomedical,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Public Reason, Bioethics, and Public Policy: A Seductive Delusion or Ambitious Aspiration?

Leonard M Fleck,Leonard M. Fleck

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180124000124

2024-03-12

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Abstract:Can Rawlsian public reason sufficiently justify public policies that regulate or restrain controversial medical and technological interventions in bioethics (and the broader social world), such as abortion, physician aid-in-dying, CRISPER-cas9 gene editing of embryos, surrogate mothers, pre-implantation genetic diagnosis of eight-cell embryos, and so on? The first part of this essay briefly explicates the central concepts that define Rawlsian political liberalism. The latter half of this essay then demonstrates how a commitment to Rawlsian public reason can ameliorate (not completely resolve) many of the policy disagreements related to bioethically controversial medical interventions today. The goal of public reason is to reduce the size of the disagreement by eliminating features of the disagreement that violate the norms of public reason. The norms of public reason are those norms that are politically necessary to preserve the liberal, pluralistic, democratic character of this society. What remains is reasonable disagreement to be addressed through normal democratic deliberative processes. Specific issues addressed from a public reason perspective include personal responsibility for excessive health costs, the utility of a metaphysical definition of death for organ transplantation, and the moral status of excess embryos generated through IVF and/or their use in medical research.

social sciences, biomedical,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Dignity, conscience and religious pluralism in healthcare: An argument for a presumption in favour of respect for religious belief

David G Kirchhoffer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13110

Bioethics

Abstract:Religious pluralism in healthcare means that conflicts regarding appropriate treatment can occur because of convictions of patients and healthcare workers alike. This contribution argues for a presumption in favour of respect for religious belief on the basis that such convictions are judgements of conscience, and respect for conscience is core to what it means to respect human dignity. The human person is a subject in relation to all that is. Human dignity refers to the worth of human persons as members of the species with capacities of reason and free choice that enable the realisation of dignity as self-worth through morally good behaviour. Conscience is both a feature of inherent dignity and necessary for acquiring dignity as self-worth. Conscience enables a person to identify objective values and disvalues for human flourishing, the rational capacity to reason about the relative importance of these values and the right way to achieve them and the judgement of the good end and the right means. Human persons are bound to follow their conscience because this is their subjective relationship to objective truth. Religious convictions are decisions of conscience because they are subjective judgements about objective truth. The presumption of respect for religious belief is limited by the normative dimension of human dignity such that a person's beliefs may be overridden if they objectively violate inherent dignity or morally legitimate acquired dignity.
Three Arguments Against Institutional Conscientious Objection, and Why They Are (Metaphysically) Unconvincing

Xavier Symons,Reginald Mary Chua

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhae012

2024-04-01

Abstract:Abstract The past decade has seen a burgeoning of scholarly interest in conscientious objection in healthcare. While the literature to date has focused primarily on individual healthcare practitioners who object to participation in morally controversial procedures, in this article we consider a different albeit related issue, namely, whether publicly funded healthcare institutions should be required to provide morally controversial services such as abortions, emergency contraception, voluntary sterilizations, and voluntary euthanasia. Substantive debates about institutional responsibility have remained largely at the level of first-order ethical debate over medical practices which institutions have refused to offer; in this article, we argue that more fundamental questions about the metaphysics of institutions provide a neglected avenue for understanding the basis of institutional conscientious objection. To do so, we articulate a metaphysical model of institutional conscience, and consider three well-known arguments for undermining institutional conscientious objection in light of this model. We show how our metaphysical analysis of institutions creates difficulties for justifying sanctions on institutions that conscientiously object. Thus, we argue, questions about the metaphysics of institutions are deserving of serious attention from both critics and defenders of institutional conscientious objection.

social sciences, biomedical,ethics
Thomas Hobbes and ‘gently instilled’ conscience

Amy Gais

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01916599.2021.1894591

2021-03-19

History of European Ideas

Abstract:This article engages with a key interpretive puzzle in Hobbes's political thought – his seemingly contradictory view of liberty of conscience – and argues that Hobbes theorizes civic education as a powerful tool to confront and refashion prevailing views of conscience in early modernity. While influential accounts have recovered more 'tolerant' arguments in Hobbes's political thought, recent revisionist accounts have argued that Hobbes does not merely advocate for the compulsion of outward conformity but also subjects' inward persuasion. Yet this nuanced attention to the sovereign's role in cultivating obedient, peaceful subjects does not attend fully to his shaping of the consciences of his subjects. Situating Hobbes in the early modern discourse on casuistry, as well as political debates on educational reform, reveals that the sovereign can and should try to shape the consciences of subjects, specifically returning to a view of conscience as a kind of 'knowing with' others. Reframing Hobbes's project of civic education as a strategy to 'gently instill' the consciences of subjects does not merely shed light on the interpretive puzzle of Hobbes's ambivalence towards toleration but also draws attention to one of the most powerful and arguably underappreciated ways to overcome the threat of conscience to sovereignty.
Reduced Astrocytic Contribution to the Turnover of Glutamate, Glutamine, and GABA Characterizes the Latent Phase in the Kainate Model of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

S. Alvestad,J. Hammer,H. Qu,A. Håberg,O. Ottersen,U. Sonnewald

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jcbfm.2011.36

2011-08-01

Abstract:
Conscience, Disobedience, and Standard of Care

Stephen R Latham

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.4903

Abstract:In the article "Principled Conscientious Provision: Referral Symmetry and Its Implications for Protecting Secular Conscience," Abram L. Brummett, Tanner Hafen, and Mark C. Navin reject what they call the "referral asymmetry" in U.S. conscientious objection law in medicine, which recognizes rights of conscientiously objecting physicians to withhold referrals for medical interventions but does not (yet) recognize rights of physicians to make referrals for medical interventions to which they are morally committed but to which their health care institutions are morally opposed. This commentary concentrates on a second asymmetry, namely, the relationship of a health care provider's referral or nonreferral to the medical standard of care. The commentary argues that this second asymmetry seems to require action more appropriately recognized as civil disobedience than conscientious provision of referral.
On Being Responsible: Ethical Issues in Appeals to Personal Responsibility in Health Campaigns

N Guttman,W H Ressler,Nurit Guttman,William Harris Ressler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/108107301750254466

2001-04-01

Journal of Health Communication

Abstract:Appeals to personal responsibility are highly prevalent in health communication campaigns, but their use entails both moral and strategic considerations. This article provides an overview of the notion of personal responsibility as a persuasive appeal in public health communication campaigns and an analysis of concomitant ethical implications. Whereas the issue of responsibility often is acknowledged by practitioners and scholars as a perennial challenge in health interventions, conceptual tools for the identification of its subtle manifestations are not readily available. This article outlines a framework that contextualizes potentially paradoxical consequences of campaign appeals to personal responsibility that can be explained by the medieval allegory of the "Tragedy of the Commons," psychological attribution theory, and public health concerns regarding "blaming the victim." Practice-oriented questions are introduced to help identify ethical issues in personal responsibility appeals that can be utilized in the design and implementation of health campaigns.

information science & library science,communication
Cultivating Conscience: How Good Laws Make Good People

Lynn A. Stout

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400836000

2010-10-24

Abstract:Acknowledgements vii PART ONE Chapter 1: Franco's Choice 3 Chapter 2: Holmes' Folly 23 Chapter 3: Blind to Goodness: Why We Don't See Conscience 45 PART TWO Chapter 4: Games People Play: Unselfish Prosocial Behavior in Experimental Gaming 75 Chapter 5: The Jekyll/Hyde Syndrome: A Three-Factor Social Model of Unselfish Prosocial Behavior 94 Chapter 6: Origins 122 PART THREE Chapter 7: My Brother's Keeper: The Role of Unselfishness in Tort Law 151 Chapter 8: Picking Prosocial Partners: The Story of Relational Contract 175 Chapter 9: Crime, Punishment, and Community 200 PART FOUR Conclusion Chariots of the Sun 233 Notes 255 Works Cited 281 Index 299

Psychology,Law,Philosophy
Justifying a presumption of restraint in animal biotechnology research

Autumn Fiester

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160802248138

Abstract:Articulating the public's widespread unease about animal biotechnology has not been easy, and the first attempts have not been able to provide an effective tool for navigating the moral permissibility of this research. Because these moral intuitions have been difficult to cash out, they have been belittled as representing nothing more than fear or confusion. But there are sound philosophical reasons supporting the public's opposition to animal biotechnology and these arguments justify a default position of resistance I call the Presumption of Restraint. The Presumption of Restraint constitutes a justificatory process that sets out the criteria for permitting or rejecting individual biotechnology projects. This Presumption of Restraint can be overridden by compelling arguments that speak to a project's moral and scientific merit. This strategy creates a middle-of-the-road stance that can embrace particular projects, while rejecting others. The Presumption of Restraint can also serve as a model for assessing moral permissibility in other areas of technological innovation.
Justifying children and young people’s involvement in social research: Assessing harm and benefit

Danielle Kennan,Pat Dolan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0791603517711860

2017-05-29

Irish Journal of Sociology

Abstract:At a time when children and young people’s involvement in research is increasingly the norm, this article reflects on the importance of a well-reasoned and transparent justification for their inclusion or exclusion. It explores the dilemma of a researcher’s ethical obligation to protect children and young people from harm and at the same time respect their autonomy as social actors and independent rights holders to participate in research of relevance to their lives. A researcher’s ethical obligation to conduct a rigorous but balanced assessment of harm and benefit is reiterated. The article takes the debate beyond a call for assessing harm and benefit to providing a strategy for conducting such an assessment at the point of research design. Reflecting on two research projects the authors were involved in, three critical considerations are identified. These are: the purpose and the theoretical context of the research; the preferences of the children and young people and their parents; and the available time and resources. The article draws on the research examples to illustrate the assessment process in practice.
Positive psychology is value-laden—It’s time to embrace it

Michael M. Prinzing

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2020.1716049

2020-01-14

The Journal of Positive Psychology

Abstract:Evaluative claims and assumptions are ubiquitous in positive psychology. Some will deny this. But such disavowals are belied by the literature. Some will consider the presence of evaluative claims a problem and hope to root them out. But this is a mistake. If positive psychology is to live up to its raison d'être – to be the scientific study of the psychological components of human flourishing or well-being – it must make evaluative claims. Well-being consists in those things that are good for us, that make life go well. Thus, one cannot investigate this topic without making claims about what is good for people and what they have reason to do. It's time, therefore, to embrace the fact that positive psychology is value-laden. Doing so would benefit the field by allowing for more rigorous theorizing, and – perhaps counterintuitively – increasing the field's objectivity.

Justifying Positive Appeals to Conscience: The Debate We Can’t Avoid

The Merits and Limits of Conscience-Based Legal Exemptions

The Reasonable Content of Conscience in Public Bioethics

The Balanced View of the Value of Conscience

Harmonizing conscience claims and patient access to assisted death

Toward social responsibility, not the social responsibility semblance: marketing does not need a conscience

A Model of Justification

Disclaiming, Mitigating, and Character Boosting—How Targets of Investigate Journalism Negotiate Guilt, Excuses, Justification, and Morality

Is Conscience Best Understood as a Particular Form of Consciousness? Theological and Ethical Reflections Inspired by the Phenomenology of Maurice Merleau-Ponty

Refusals and Requests: In Defense of Consistency

Public Reason, Bioethics, and Public Policy: A Seductive Delusion or Ambitious Aspiration?

Dignity, conscience and religious pluralism in healthcare: An argument for a presumption in favour of respect for religious belief

Three Arguments Against Institutional Conscientious Objection, and Why They Are (Metaphysically) Unconvincing

Thomas Hobbes and ‘gently instilled’ conscience

Reduced Astrocytic Contribution to the Turnover of Glutamate, Glutamine, and GABA Characterizes the Latent Phase in the Kainate Model of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

Conscience, Disobedience, and Standard of Care

On Being Responsible: Ethical Issues in Appeals to Personal Responsibility in Health Campaigns

Cultivating Conscience: How Good Laws Make Good People

Justifying a presumption of restraint in animal biotechnology research

Justifying children and young people’s involvement in social research: Assessing harm and benefit

Positive psychology is value-laden—It’s time to embrace it