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 17: Brandon Fogel discusses mechanism and causation

Episode 17: Brandon Fogel discusses mechanism and causation

In this episode, Brandon Fogel discusses how attitudes toward the idea of action at a distance have changed over the course of history. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

8 Marras 201033min

Episode 16: Amartya Sen discusses justice

Episode 16: Amartya Sen discusses justice

In this episode, Amartya Sen critiques the idea that in order to make our society more just, we have to model it on an ideal. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

6 Loka 201027min

Episode 15: Brian Leiter discusses religious toleration

Episode 15: Brian Leiter discusses religious toleration

In this episode, Brian Leiter considers whether claims of religious conscience--as opposed to claims of other matters of conscience--should be given special status under the law. Hosted on Acast. See ...

8 Syys 201036min

Episode 14: Edward Witherspoon discusses skepticism

Episode 14: Edward Witherspoon discusses skepticism

In this episode, Edward Witherspoon considers whether a disembodied brain could, in principle, have the ability to think. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

2 Elo 201033min

Episode 13: Fabrizio Cariani discusses judgment aggregation

Episode 13: Fabrizio Cariani discusses judgment aggregation

In this episode, Fabrizio Cariani discusses how the beliefs held by a single person in a group relate to the beliefs held by that group as a whole. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more info...

9 Heinä 201023min

Episode 12: Jason Bridges discusses contextualism

Episode 12: Jason Bridges discusses contextualism

In this episode, Jason Bridges discusses how a single sentence can mean completely different things in different contexts, and why this is of particular interest to philosophers. Hosted on Acast. See ...

3 Kesä 201040min

Episode 11: Martin Gustafsson discusses philosophical pictures

Episode 11: Martin Gustafsson discusses philosophical pictures

In this episode, Martin Gustafsson discusses Ludwig Wittgenstein's thoughts on the commonsense belief that the meaning of a word is the thing for which the word stands. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/...

7 Touko 201023min

Episode 10: Richard Kraut discusses goodness

Episode 10: Richard Kraut discusses goodness

In this episode, Richard Kraut discusses the contrast between being good for someone and simply being good. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

5 Huhti 201022min

Suosittua kategoriassa Yhteiskunta

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