The Bright Line of Ethical Agency

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 240-257
Author(s):  
Stevens F. Wandmacher ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Positive Case ◽  
Machine Ethics ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
First Line ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Bright Line ◽  
Moral Machines ◽  
Ethical Agency ◽  
Full Ethical Agents

In his article The Nature, Importance, and Difficulty of Machine Ethics, James H. Moor distinguishes two lines of argument for those who wish to draw a “bright line” between full ethical agents, such as human beings, and “weaker” ethical agents, such as machines whose actions have significant moral ramifications. The first line of argument is that only full ethical agents are agents at all. The second is that no machine could have the presumed features necessary for ethical agency. This paper shows why Moor is mistaken in his refutation of the first line of argument; it also makes a positive case that “weaker” ethical agents are not agents at all. This positive case, however, allows Moor’s rejection of the second line of argument to stand: allowing that there could be moral machines, but that these machines would have to be full moral agents and not merely something that models moral behavior or can be used in morally charged ways.

scholarly journals Whose morality? Which rationality? Challenging artificial intelligence as a remedy for the lack of moral enhancement

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Silviya Serafimova
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Intelligent Agents ◽  
Machine Ethics ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
First Order ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Act Utilitarianism ◽  
Implicit And Explicit

Abstract Moral implications of the decision-making process based on algorithms require special attention within the field of machine ethics. Specifically, research focuses on clarifying why even if one assumes the existence of well-working ethical intelligent agents in epistemic terms, it does not necessarily mean that they meet the requirements of autonomous moral agents, such as human beings. For the purposes of exemplifying some of the difficulties in arguing for implicit and explicit ethical agents in Moor’s sense, three first-order normative theories in the field of machine ethics are put to test. Those are Powers’ prospect for a Kantian machine, Anderson and Anderson’s reinterpretation of act utilitarianism and Howard and Muntean’s prospect for a moral machine based on a virtue ethical approach. By comparing and contrasting the three first-order normative theories, and by clarifying the gist of the differences between the processes of calculation and moral estimation, the possibility for building what—one might call strong “moral” AI scenarios—is questioned. The possibility of weak “moral” AI scenarios is likewise discussed critically.

Responding to Simkulet’s objections to the two tragedies argument

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-224
Author(s):  
Henrik Friberg-Fernros
Keyword(s):  
Spontaneous Abortion ◽  
Thought Experiment ◽  
Induced Abortion ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
First Line ◽  
Induced Abortions

The two tragedies argument (2TA) has been raised as a response to the argument against abortion from spontaneous abortion (or miscarriages). According to this argument against the antiabortion position (AAP), miscarriages should be of great concern for proponents of this position since they result in a greater amount of deaths of human beings than induced abortions do. According to critics of AAP, this fact undermines its plausibility, since proponents of the AAP either must try to prevent miscarriages to the same extent as they try to prevent abortions or abandon their opposition to at least some abortions—which are not acceptable options for proponents of APP. The claim of 2TA is that one can differentiate between induced abortion and miscarriages due to the fact that the former involves the act of killing of another human being. This fact adds a tragedy to the tragedy that both abortions and miscarriages result in – the death of a human being – and contributes to justifying the choice of proponents of AAP to prioritise the prevention of abortions rather than miscarriages. In this response, I defend 2TA against criticism that claims that this argument is: (1) inconsistent with the AAP and (2) trivialises the death of the fetus. My claim is that the first line of criticism rests on a misunderstanding of the premises of 2TA while the second line of criticism rests on a disanalogous thought experiment. I therefore conclude that these objections fail.

Social Representations and Commitment

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Bonetto ◽  
Fabien Girandola ◽  
Grégory Lo Monaco
Keyword(s):  
Social Representations ◽  
Social Representation ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
First Line ◽  
Research Perspectives ◽  
The Social ◽  
Bibliographic Search ◽  
English Articles

Abstract. This contribution consists of a critical review of the literature about the articulation of two traditionally separated theoretical fields: social representations and commitment. Besides consulting various works and communications, a bibliographic search was carried out (between February and December, 2016) on various databases using the keywords “commitment” and “social representation,” in the singular and in the plural, in French and in English. Articles published in English or in French, that explicitly made reference to both terms, were included. The relations between commitment and social representations are approached according to two approaches or complementary lines. The first line follows the role of commitment in the representational dynamics: how can commitment transform the representations? This articulation gathers most of the work on the topic. The second line envisages the social representations as determinants of commitment procedures: how can these representations influence the effects of commitment procedures? This literature review will identify unexploited tracks, as well as research perspectives for both areas of research.

mCRPC: Cabazitaxel zukünftige Second-line-Option nach Docetaxel?

2010 ◽  
Vol 01 (06) ◽  
pp. 282-282
Author(s):  
Birgit-Kristin Pohlmann
Keyword(s):  
Second Line ◽  
First Line

Bislang steht für Patienten mit metastasiertem kastrationsresistentem Prostatakarzinom (mCRPC), die auf die Standard-First-line-Chemotherapie mit Docetaxel nicht mehr adäquat ansprechen, keine Evidenz-basierte Therapieoption zur Verfügung. Große Hoffnungen verbinden sich daher mit Cabazitaxel, einer neuen Substanz, die diesen Patienten noch einmal die Chance auf eine Überlebenszeitverlängerung bietet. In den USA ist Cabazitaxel bereits für die Second-line-Behandlung beim mCRPC nach Docetaxel-Versagen zugelassen. In Europa ist die Zulassung für diese Indikation bean-tragt.

A Rational Sequencing of Anti-Angiogenic Agents as Second-Line Treatment Choice for mCRC Patients Progressing After a Bevacizumab-Based First Line

2020 ◽  
pp. 14-19
Author(s):  
Sara De Dosso
Keyword(s):  
Acquired Resistance ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Cancer Therapies ◽  
Vascular Endothelial ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Vegf Pathway ◽  
Effective Choice ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor

A large proportion of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) experience disease progression after first-line treatment with chemotherapy and bevacizumab, an anti-angiogenic agent, as a result of acquired resistance. However, blocking angiogenesis by targeted therapy towards the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway still forms an essential part of the second-line treatment strategy. Although three approved evidence-based choices for angiogenic agents (continuing treatment with bevacizumab, ramucirumab and aflibercept) are currently available in the second line, making the most effective choice is challenging due to the lack of studies directly comparing these agents. Moreover, despite huge investigational efforts, no predictive biomarker for anti-angiogenic cancer therapies could be identified so far.

Efficacy and Toxicity of Addition of Bevacizumab to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 718-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Cong Ruan ◽  
Yue-Ping Che ◽  
Li Ding ◽  
Hai-Feng Li
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Clinical Prognosis ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Pre-treated patients with first-line treatment can be offered a second treatment with the aim of improving their poor clinical prognosis. The therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who did not respond to first-line therapy has limited treatment options. Recently, many studies have paid much attention to the efficacy of bevacizumab as an adjuvant treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with bevacizumab-naive based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in people with metastatic CRC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies updated to March 2018. Randomized-controlled trials comparing addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy without bevacizumab in MCRC patients were included, of which, the main interesting results were the efficacy and safety profiles of the addition of bevacizumab in patients with MCRC as second-line therapy. Result: Five trials were eligible in the meta-analysis. Patients who received the combined bevacizumab and chemotherapy treatment in MCRC as second-line therapy showed a longer overall survival (OS) (OR=0.80,95%CI=0.72-0.89, P<0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (OR=0.69,95%CI=0.61-0.77, P<0.00001). In addition, there was no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR) (RR=1.36,95%CI=0.82-2.24, P=0.23) or severe adverse event (SAE) (RR=1.02,95%CI=0.88-1.19, P=0.78) between bevacizumab-based chemotherapy and bevacizumabnaive based chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the addition of bevacizumab to the chemotherapy therapy could be an efficient and safe treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as second-line therapy and without increasing the risk of an adverse event.

scholarly journals Immediate hypersensitivity reaction followed by successful oral desensitization to ursodiol

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Yue Lee ◽  
Christine Song
Keyword(s):  
Hypersensitivity Reaction ◽  
Primary Biliary Cholangitis ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Immediate Hypersensitivity ◽  
First Line ◽  
Case Presentation ◽  
Desensitization Protocol ◽  
First Line Treatment ◽  
Oral Desensitization

Abstract Background Immediate hypersensitivity reaction to ursodiol is rare and there is no previously published protocol on ursodiol desensitization. Case presentation A 59-year-old woman with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) developed an immediate hypersensitivity reaction to ursodiol—the first-line treatment for PBC. When she switched to a second-line treatment, her PBC continued to progress. As such, she completed a novel 12-step desensitization protocol to oral ursodiol. She experienced recurrent pruritus after each dose following desensitization, which subsided after a month of being on daily ursodiol. Conclusion Immediate hypersensitivity reaction to ursodiol is uncommon. Our case demonstrated that this novel desensitization protocol to ursodiol could be safely implemented when alternative options are not available or have proven inferior in efficacy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document