著者

水野 俊誠

出版者

東北哲学会

雑誌

東北哲学会年報 (ISSN:09139354)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.32, pp.33-48, 2016 (Released:2022-08-04)

著者

下川 潔 土井 美徳 岩井 淳 村上 智章 有江 大介 冲永 宜司 松園 伸 古田 拓也 伊藤 誠一郎 水野 俊誠 戒能 通弘 勢力 尚雅 壽里 竜

出版者

日本イギリス哲学会

雑誌

イギリス哲学研究 (ISSN:03877450)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.41, pp.53-92, 2018-03-20 (Released:2021-04-16)

著者

水野 俊誠

出版者

日本医学哲学・倫理学会

雑誌

医学哲学 医学倫理 (ISSN:02896427)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.33, pp.21-29, 2015-09-30 (Released:2018-02-01)

---

Can brain-death be the criterion of human death? This paper examines critically the main views regarding this issue and proposes a new view. First, I argue that the following three major views are implausible: (1) the President's Commission's view (the whole brain formulation), (2) Shewmon's view(the circulation formulation), and (3) Lizza's view (the higher brain formulation). Second, I propose my view. Distinguishing two questions-"Can brain-death be the criterion of(human) biological death?" and "Can brain-death be the criterion of (human) legal death?", the following points are discussed: (1) With regard to the first question, given that some organs function in harmony together in brain dead patients, their somatic organization is maintained, i.e., brain dead patients are still alive. Therefore, brain-death cannot be the criterion of biological death. (2) With regard to the second question, if four-organ systems are (biologically alive but) legally dead, so are brain dead patients, and thus brain-death can serve as a criterion of legal death. On the other hand, based on the premise that four-organ systems could be considered an intermediate state between being alive and dead, brain-dead patients would also be considered being in the intermediate state; therefore, brain-death cannot serve as the criterion of legal death.

著者

水野 俊誠

出版者

日本医学哲学・倫理学会

雑誌

医学哲学 医学倫理 (ISSN:02896427)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.25, pp.11-19, 2007-10-18 (Released:2018-02-01)

---

It is believer that the concepts of mental illness, mental disease, and mental disorders, which represent the theoretical basis of psychiatry and psychiatric medicine, are more likely to bring about problems in use than the concepts of physical illness, physical disease, and physical disorders. In this paper, I will consider two such problems : (1)the concepts of mental illness, mental disease, and mental disorders often bring about more conflicts among experts regarding the diagnosis than that of physical illness, physical disease, and physical disorders ; and (2)there are more conflicts over whether some mental illness, mental disease, and mental disorders are illnesses or disease in a relevant sense as compared to physical illnesses, physical illnesses, physical disease, and physical disorders. Szasz, Boorse, and Fulford have all responded to the question of why these problems have com about. In this paper, I will critically examine their responses and then propose my own response to this question in the following manner. First, the concepts of mental illness, mental disease, and mental disorders bring about more conflicts among experts than that of physical illness, physical disease, and physical disorders because there is no consensus on whether the painters' condition damage their natural primary goods. According to Rawls, primary goods are "things that every rational man is presumed to want." Some primary goods such as health, vigor, intelligence, and imagination are natural goods ; although their possession is influenced by the basic structure of society, they are not directly under its control. Second, there is much debate about whether particular mental disorders, such as personality disorders, are illness or disease in a relevant sense as compared to physical disorders. This is because the evidence for biological deviations corresponding to mental disorders is often more lacking than that for physical disorders.

著者

盛永 審一郎 加藤 尚武 秋葉 悦子 浅見 昇吾 甲斐 克則 香川 知晶 忽那 敬三 久保田 顕二 蔵田 伸雄 小出 泰士 児玉 聡 小林 真紀 品川 哲彦 本田 まり 松田 純 飯田 亘之 水野 俊誠

出版者

富山大学

雑誌

基盤研究(B)

巻号頁・発行日

2011-11-18

---

終末期の意思決定に関する法制度・ガイドライン等を批判的に検討した結果、以下のことが明らかとなった。①医師ー患者関係に信頼性があり、透明性が担保されていれば、すべり坂の仮説はおこらないこと、②緩和ケアと安楽死は、相互に排他的なものではなくて、よき生の終結ケアの不可欠の要素であること、③それにもかかわらず、「すべり坂の仮説」を完全に払拭しえないのは、通常の医療である治療の差し控えや中止、緩和医療を施行するとき、患者の同意を医師が必ずしもとらないことにあること。したがって、通常の治療を含むすべての終末期ケアを透明にする仕組みの構築こそが『死の質の良さを』を保証する最上の道であると、我々は結論した。

著者

水野 俊誠

出版者

慶應義塾大学倫理学研究会

雑誌

エティカ (ISSN:18830528)

巻号頁・発行日

no.8, pp.45-89, 2015

---

はじめに第1節 功利主義とは第2節 ヒューム道徳論の功利主義的解釈第3節 ヒューム道徳論の非功利主義的な解釈第4節 ヒュームの道徳論の功利主義的・非功利主義的側面

著者

水野 俊誠

出版者

日本哲学会

雑誌

哲学 (ISSN:03873358)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2011, no.62, pp.315-328_L18, 2011 (Released:2011-12-09)

参考文献数

19

---

Three main theories exist concerning the concept of happiness: the hedonism theory, the desire fulfillment theory, and the objective list theory. The hedonism theory states that happiness has pleasure or pleasurable mental states as its only required component. According to the desire fulfillment theory, happiness is obtained when one's desires are fulfilled. In the objective list theory, the pursuit of certain things contributes to happiness, regardless of whether these are desired or lead to pleasurable mental states.John Stuart Mill is often labeled a hedonist because he wrote, “By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure”. However, some of his writings also indicate that he accepts the desire fulfillment theory and the objective list theory as well. Many different interpretations have therefore been presented concerning Mill's concept of happiness, and in this paper I examine some of the main interpretations and clarify Mill's concept of happiness.I propose that Mill's fundamental position is hedonism, but argue that his concept of happiness was consistent with some elements of the objective list theoryes. When considering elements of the objective list theory, he admits that happiness comprises the pursuit of certain things for themselves; however, he does not agree that such things contribute to happiness regardless of their pleasantness.My interpretation of Mill's concept of happiness is consistent with the evolution of his thought as it developed away from Benthamic hedonism and later incorporated Romanticism.

著者

盛永 審一郎 加藤 尚武 秋葉 悦子 磯部 哲 今井 道夫 香川 知晶 忽那 敬三 蔵田 伸雄 小出 泰士 児玉 聡 小林 真紀 坂井 昭宏 品川 哲彦 松田 純 山内 廣隆 山本 達 飯田 亘之 水野 俊誠

出版者

富山大学

雑誌

基盤研究(B)

巻号頁・発行日

2008

---

1)20世紀に外延的に同値された神学的-哲学的概念としての「尊厳」と政治的概念としての「権利」は内包的に同一ではないということ。また、「価値」は比較考量可能であるのに対し、「尊厳」は比較考量不可であるということ。2)倫理的に中立であるとされたiPS細胞研究も結局は共犯可能性を逃れ得ないこと、学際的学問としてのバイオエシックスは、生命技術を押し進める装置でしかなかったということ。3)20世紀末に登場した「身体の倫理」と「生-資本主義」の精神の間には何らかの選択的親和関係があるということ。