Thursday, May 30th, 2013 at 9:57 am
Monday Mr Burgess-Jackson posted a short ethics question:
You are a doctor. You have five patients, each of whom is about to die due to a failing organ of some kind. You have another patient who is healthy.
The only way that you can save the lives of the first five patients is to transplant five of this young man’s organs (against his will) into the bodies of the other five patients. If you do this, the young man will die, but the other five patients will live.
Is it appropriate for you to perform this transplant in order to save five of your patients?
I’d like to propose a variant, because I don’t think the doctor (“do no harm”) should ever consider this as given. (below the fold) Read the rest of this entry
Tuesday, May 28th, 2013 at 9:28 am
Tonight I return the Internet black hole, I’m trying the third hotel (and final) in the area to see if they, unlike the others, have “high-speed” internet that is faster than dialup.
- An ethics question.
- “Other weapons systems” … equals drones?
- Fur yur amoozment.
- Not a co-conspirator.
- Fine tuning comes to inflation.
- 13 years ago, Honda sold a 1 liter three cylinder inline powered car … still waiting.
- And you tell the wife, parents, and children of the dead patient you “did no harm”? This isn’t an ethical dilemma.
- Of names and men.
OK. Remember today, first off … do no harm.
Monday, May 27th, 2013 at 5:26 pm
I hope everyone had a good memorable Memorial day. If you want to read something patriotic, I often recommend the first chapter or two or the Book of Ruth. Ruth’s declamatory statement to Naomi strikes me as the essence of patriotism.
- I have to confess, unlike many readers, I find the likability of the protagonist important, for example that was a reason I couldn’t stand the Thomas Covenant series. The protagonist doesn’t have to be likable I guess, but it really really helps if there is someone who is likable.
- Legal-like moonshine.
- Law and drones continued.
- Academic failings.
- Theodicy and Presidential statements … so do you think Presidents and other politicians actually read the context of the verses they choose? Did this President do so?
- Liberal hack and … uncivil as well? Don’t worry the liberal hack thing will keep him is moonlight job as a NYTimes pundit and liberals stapled to the cause will never believe he might say or do wrong.
- Scandal in India.
- Future’s so bright and all … maybe.
- Star Trek, sliced and diced (spoilers aplenty) (HT Ms (slightly) Mad Minerva).
- Bars of the uneven kind.
- PEDs and a mountain.
- So … you’re in Nashville. Where to go? What do do? How about this?
- Benghazi the narrative in local context.
- Not a lot of running on warships, eh?
- A very bad day.
Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 at 8:38 pm
Henry II had a stalwart friend and assistant in Thomas Beckett his chancellor. When there was a chance to elevate Thomas to a position of arch-Bishop of Canterbury Henry did so, thinking he’d have a close ally in the Church. What he didn’t realize was that Beckett was loyal not to him as his chancellor but the office … and when he was head cleric … he was likewise loyal to his office and no longer a close friend and ally of the King. In a frustrated rage (and Henry had a temper) Henry famously hollered “will someone not rid me of this meddlesome priest” … and two knights took him at his word, rode forth in the night to Canterbury and slew the Bishop in cold blood at the altar, an act which shocked and horrified both England and their King who never actually intended this act to be carried out.
The left in general and the left elite in particular see themselves as the faithful guardians and representatives of the people. A popular movement arising naturally belongs within their party, not the opposition. When this occurs it is an affront to their long held assumptions that the ordinary folk are their constituents and this movement is a betrayal (just talk to a gay conservative as to how liberals treat with them … for a party that thinks that harsh words against oppressed groups are harmful, they are mighty quick to use them themselves).
Mr Obama has joked about using the IRS as a political tool, he’s remarked how Tea Party members were nefarious, he’s publicly called out persons and groups to be targeted by liberal pressure. Low and behold a few knights ride out to do his bidding. Actually more than a few, but who’s counting. Apparently we are to believe there was no connection between his attitude, the atmosphere he encouraged in his administration and its behavior. History if I remember, finds Henry culpable for the consequences of his remarks. History likewise, will likely find Mr Obama culpable for the spate of government overreach and partisanship it demonstrates …
On the other hand, it seems calls for “impeach the bum” keep coming from the right. Uhm, a few points to this remark:
- Biden? Geesh
- The President is tried in the Senate, by Senators not a few of whom have Presidential aspirations and for which a majority share the same political party as the President.
- Which means, the only actual good that would come of impeachment is … that it would shut down the federal government for a month or so.
- and finally, Biden? If that doesn’t frighten you, nothing will.
Oh, wait. Point #3 might be the actual point. Impeachment even without conviction would be likely to hamstring the President during and afterwards … and he’s not going to be convicted so the Biden threat isn’t very real.
Thursday, May 16th, 2013 at 2:06 pm
Busy morning for me. You?
- If our plan holds, this is the next “family” car after the kids move out … or the equivalent in 2017.
- A few years in the cellar.
- “Mystical” … what does that mean to ABC I wonder.
- The standards … they are double, eh?
- An aesthetic is a method for evaluating art. By what aesthetic is that worth that much? Not one I might fathom.
- Some games and a photo-essay.
- Two very different posts on exercise, here and here.
- While you’re thinking about the IRS.
- Ink on skin meets religion in the Middle East.
- OK liberals … defend this! or this.
- School and men.
- Frakking and the obvious.
- He calls it “inexcusable” and is right glad his Chicago training taught him how to have no tracks back to himself on this one … at least as long as those losing their jobs keep their mouths shut.
- And we end with a discussion of a fictional figure in popular media.
Monday, May 13th, 2013 at 1:37 pm
OK. Take a few
- Colorado oversteps. Would local zoning laws do it?
- All that sex talk makes Lucy a duller girl.
- A set of odd wheels for bikes.
- Devil(s) … impersonal or not?
- Why? Maybe they were wearing swim suits not sweaters. More on that IRS thing here.
- Touche.
- Purple prose.
- Great apes and swimming … and the resultant map.
- Heh.
- A mom reflects on mother’s day.
- Losing the left on the Benghazi kerfuffle.
- A good question, after all most of the research was supported by your taxes. And is arXIV sufficient to ameliorate the problem?
- Famousness.
The White House talking point on Benghazi is that the hearings “told us nothing new”, which I think isn’t exactly what they were hoping for. You’d think that they would be wanting those hearings to exonerate them, instead of confirming what we already knew, i.e., that they were scoundrels.