Re: Ethics, abortions, and VA research

[Jim Muckerheide <muckerheide@mediaone.net>]

Wesley M. Dunn wrote:
> 
> Dave,
> 
> Good notes on ethics.  

Maybe we should leave the ethics to the ethicists. In the ethics literature
this is just technocratic rationalization. If someone puts gun to your head
and holds out his hand, Dave's arguement is that he didn't actually say he
wanted your money, so you must have given it to him voluntarily. :-) 
(especially if it turned out to be a plastic gun!? :-)  Ethics goes beyond
word games. That's just for bureaucrats and lawyers.

>While it is probably futile discussing
> anything with Muckerheide, it may clarify the discussion for other
> readers.

Perhaps some are not so narrowly focused and defensive.

> Wes

Regards, Jim
 
> > Date sent:      Tue, 5 Aug 97 14:10:44 -0500
> > Send reply to:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> > From:           David Scherer <scherer@uiuc.edu>
> > To:             Multiple recipients of list
> <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> > Subject:        Re: Ethics, abortions, and VA research
> 
> > Jim,
> >
> > The crux of your argument seems to be that the LNT model is
> "unreasonable."
> >  You augment this assertion by impugning the motives of those
> advancing the
> > model.  Again, I must insist that the accuracy of the model is NOT
> the
> > center of the ETHICAL debate.  Even questions about motives are NOT
> > central.  Motives might be important to personal morals (i.e. are
> they good
> > people), but they do not address questions of social responsibility.
> ...
> *********************************************************************
> Wesley M. Dunn, CHP                        512-834-6688
> Deputy Director, Licensing                 512-834-6690 (fax)
> (Texas) Bureau of Radiation Control        wdunn@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us
> *********************************************************************