Episode 149: Lainie Ross and Christos Lazaridis talk about defining death
Elucidations14 Huhti 2024

Episode 149: Lainie Ross and Christos Lazaridis talk about defining death

In this episode, we are joined by Lainie Ross (University of Rochester Medical Center) and (once again!) Christos Lazaridis (UChicago Medicine), this time to talk about the different ways of defining death.


In our previous episode with Christos, we talked about death and the vexed history of attempts to define it. Prior to the advent of modern life support technology in the 1950s, it was usually enough to check whether a person had a heartbeat and could breathe to determine whether they were dead. But once machines were invented that could breathe and circulate blood in patients whose lungs or hearts were failing, a new moral conundrum was born: how do you decide whether a medical patient is dead when it is now possible to keep their lungs breathing and their heart beating indefinitely?


In this episode, our distinguished guests talk about the actual criteria that physicians use to determine whether a patient is dead, as well as some possible criteria that no one has tried applying but which some doctors think would be more appropriate. Furthermore, Lainie Ross argues that every person has the right to choose which criteria will be used to determine whether they are dead. These two topics interact in interesting ways.


For example, I might have a strong preference for my doctor to pronounce me dead only if I have permanently lost all consciousness, even if I can still spontaneously breathe. Although we currently have no good method of objectively measuring whether a patient has permanently lost consciousness, Dr. Ross argues that I have the moral right to sign an agreement stating my preferences. Specifically: the agreement could state that if, in the future, the technology for determining whether someone has permanently lost consciousness gets invented, and, at that time, I have permanently lost consciousness, then I should be declared dead. On the flipside, some patients prefer a stricter criterion, often for religious reasons. Perhaps it is my religious belief that if I am breathing, then I should be considered to be alive. Lainie Ross argues that in that case, I have the moral right to sign an agreement stating that that is the criterion that doctors will use on me, in the event that I lose consciousness but am still able to spontaneously breathe.


As of right now, people only have the legal right to sign these types of agrreements in a handful of states in the US. Join us for this episode as Christos Lazaridis and Lainie Ross argue for making this legal right more widespread!

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jaksot(153)

Episode 81: Cathy Legg discusses what Peirce's categories can do for you

Episode 81: Cathy Legg discusses what Peirce's categories can do for you

In this episode, Cathy Legg talks about why Charles Sanders Peirce thought that existing was only one of three ways of being. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

15 Maalis 201637min

Episode 80: Mark Hopwood discusses love and moral value

Episode 80: Mark Hopwood discusses love and moral value

In this episode, Mark Hopwood discusses the moral relation that results when one person values another as a particular individual. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

10 Helmi 201631min

Episode 79: Anthony S. Gillies discusses conditionals

Episode 79: Anthony S. Gillies discusses conditionals

In this episode, Anthony S. Gillies shows us how difficult it is to figure out what if/then statements mean! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

6 Tammi 201632min

Episode 78: Stephen Engstrom discusses the categorical imperative

Episode 78: Stephen Engstrom discusses the categorical imperative

In this episode, Stephen Engstrom discusses the principle that Immanuel Kant thought to underlie all of ethics. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

9 Joulu 201532min

Episode 77: Mark Schroeder discusses reasons for action and belief

Episode 77: Mark Schroeder discusses reasons for action and belief

In this episode, Mark Schroeder discusses an example of how something other than evidence against a claim can give you a reason not to believe that it's true. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy fo...

13 Marras 201538min

Episode 76: Barbara Herman discusses gratitude

Episode 76: Barbara Herman discusses gratitude

In this episode, Barbara Herman describes the intricacies of the relationship between two people that is created when one does a favor for the other. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more in...

13 Loka 201542min

Episode 75: Malte Willer discusses non-monotonic logic

Episode 75: Malte Willer discusses non-monotonic logic

In this episode, Malte Willer discusses attempts to give a formal theory of commonsense reasoning, and how it differs from the kind of reasoning that has traditionally been studied. Hosted on Acast. S...

8 Syys 201531min

Episode 74: Christina van Dyke discusses gender and medieval mysticism

Episode 74: Christina van Dyke discusses gender and medieval mysticism

In this episode, Christina van Dyke discusses the medieval mystics, a loose collection of authors who thought through philosophical issues by writing about their religious experiences. Hosted on Acast...

7 Elo 201530min

Suosittua kategoriassa Yhteiskunta

olipa-kerran-otsikko
siita-on-vaikea-puhua
kaksi-aitia
gogin-ja-janin-maailmanhistoria
i-dont-like-mondays
poks
kolme-kaannekohtaa
antin-palautepalvelu
sita
mamma-mia
yopuolen-tarinoita-2
aikalisa
rss-murhan-anatomia
lahko
loukussa
rss-palmujen-varjoissa
meidan-pitais-puhua
rss-nikotellen
terapeuttiville-qa
mystista