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 105: R. A. Briggs discusses epistemic decision theory

Episode 105: R. A. Briggs discusses epistemic decision theory

How do we tell what the best strategies for changing our beliefs on the basis of new evidence might be? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

20 Huhti 201837min

Episode 104: Seth Yalcin discusses the question-sensitivity of belief

Episode 104: Seth Yalcin discusses the question-sensitivity of belief

In this episode, Seth Yalcin argues that every belief we have is implicitly framed as the answer to a question, and that at different times we're considering different questions. Hosted on Acast. See ...

4 Maalis 201838min

Episode 103: Brian Leiter explains why we should think about Marx

Episode 103: Brian Leiter explains why we should think about Marx

In this episode, we talk to Brian Leiter about why the writings of Karl Marx are helpful for understanding the current situation of the working and middle class in America, the 2016 Presidential elect...

9 Tammi 201850min

Episode 102: Josh Knobe discusses the true self

Episode 102: Josh Knobe discusses the true self

In this episode, Josh Knobe discusses a series of experiments that try to tease out what we implicitly assume about who a person really is, deep down. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more i...

1 Joulu 201733min

Episode 101: Miranda Fricker discusses blame and forgiveness

Episode 101: Miranda Fricker discusses blame and forgiveness

In this episode, Miranda Fricker argues that the purpose of blaming someone is to communicate to them your sense of why what they did was wrong. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more informa...

21 Loka 201749min

Episode 100: Agnes Callard discusses aspiration

Episode 100: Agnes Callard discusses aspiration

In this episode, Agnes Callard explains why she thinks aspiration is the process of moving from one set of values to a new set of values in the way you live your life. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/p...

22 Syys 201749min

Episode 99: Steven Nadler discusses Spinoza on freedom

Episode 99: Steven Nadler discusses Spinoza on freedom

In this episode, Steven Nadler discusses Benedict de Spinoza's unique reason-centric conception of what it is to live a good life and be free. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more informati...

13 Elo 201739min

Episode 98: Jennifer Lackey discusses credibility

Episode 98: Jennifer Lackey discusses credibility

In this episode, Jennifer Lackey discusses both how you can get things factually wrong and do something morally wrong by trusting people more than they deserve to be trusted. Hosted on Acast. See acas...

17 Heinä 201732min

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