Article (Published version) (107 Kb) - Free access
Neurosciences et éthique: que nous apprend le dilemme du wagon fou?
|Published in||Igitur: arguments philosophiques. 2011, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 1-17|
|Abstract||Contemporary normative ethics is characterized by a debate between two conflic- ting theories, deontologism and utilitarianism. Until recently, this debate has essentially used arguments, objections and thought-experiments of a conceptual nature. Following the progress in neuroimagery, Joshua Greene has introduced empirical elements in the discussion : submitting several subjects to different dilemmas, in particular the trolley problem, he has examined how their brain were reacting. He concluded that deontolo- gists were drawing on their emotions, whereas utilitarians reacted more rationally, and therefore gave a better answer from a moral point of view. Deontologists reasons are even rationalizations and confabulations, rather than authentic moral reasons. Unfortu- nately, if Greene is on the right track in introducing empirical data in this debate, his conclusions are not warranted in my opinion.|
|Keywords||Déontologisme, Utilitarisme, Neuroéthique, Dilemme du wagon fou, Principe des actions à double effet|
|Research group||Bioéthique générale (781)|
|BAERTSCHI, Bernard. Neurosciences et éthique: que nous apprend le dilemme du wagon fou?. In: Igitur: arguments philosophiques, 2011, vol. 3, n° 3, p. 1-17. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:25928|