The Good Cancer
- Astro Cat
- Posts: 451
- Joined: June 17th, 2022, 2:51 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Bernard dEspagnat
- Location: USA
The Good Cancer
Amazingly, scientists discover that this cancer, which can't be reproduced in a lab, has miraculous curative properties that could save many peoples' lives. The downside is that they have to let it grow in a human being for a long enough time in order to be able to extract enough of its magic juice.
The cancer is eventually fatal, but it can reasonably be left to grow for a couple of months (but even then, the mortality rate is nonzero, depending on patient complications).
Its healing properties are so remarkable, and it's so impossible to grow on its own in a lab or in non-human animals, that people begin to wonder about the ethics of people undergoing chemo to treat it too soon (before enough of its magic juice can be harvested).
Would it be ethical for the state to insist that someone that develops this cancer keep it in their body for a relatively safe (but again, not certainly safe) small period of time, such as a month, before they can seek to remove or treat it? After all, there are people that would die if a person chooses to remove the rare growth.
Would it be ethical to tell people that contracted this cancer, "well, you shouldn't have hang glided, now you must give up your bodily autonomy so people that would die if you removed this cancer now can live?" Do their lives trump your bodily autonomy?
--Richard Feynman
- Astro Cat
- Posts: 451
- Joined: June 17th, 2022, 2:51 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Bernard dEspagnat
- Location: USA
Re: The Good Cancer
--Richard Feynman
-
- Posts: 502
- Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am
Re: The Good Cancer
So, this thread is about abortion, isn’t it?
-
- Posts: 4696
- Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am
Re: The Good Cancer
You've posed a version of J. J. Thomson's "famous violinist" question:Astro Cat wrote: ↑July 2nd, 2022, 1:58 am Let's say that there's this exotic, hypothetical cancer that people could develop as a result of some strange mixture of the atmosphere and adrenaline: it's possible to get this cancer by going hang gliding, by riding fast on a motorcycle, rock climbing, etc. (Yeah, yeah, I know, just stay with me, I have my reasons).
Amazingly, scientists discover that this cancer, which can't be reproduced in a lab, has miraculous curative properties that could save many peoples' lives. The downside is that they have to let it grow in a human being for a long enough time in order to be able to extract enough of its magic juice.
The cancer is eventually fatal, but it can reasonably be left to grow for a couple of months (but even then, the mortality rate is nonzero, depending on patient complications).
Its healing properties are so remarkable, and it's so impossible to grow on its own in a lab or in non-human animals, that people begin to wonder about the ethics of people undergoing chemo to treat it too soon (before enough of its magic juice can be harvested).
Would it be ethical for the state to insist that someone that develops this cancer keep it in their body for a relatively safe (but again, not certainly safe) small period of time, such as a month, before they can seek to remove or treat it? After all, there are people that would die if a person chooses to remove the rare growth.
Would it be ethical to tell people that contracted this cancer, "well, you shouldn't have hang glided, now you must give up your bodily autonomy so people that would die if you removed this cancer now can live?" Do their lives trump your bodily autonomy?
https://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phi ... homson.htm
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Good Cancer
I think you mean maternal autonomy.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: The Good Cancer
...or even bodily autonomy! I think you're right: this is a bigger issue than just abortion. E.G., a woman, pregnant as a result of rape, could be forced to bear her rapist's baby, as some states want to do, is ... <shudder> To claim and exert such control is a frightening example of male supremacy? Or just of authoritarianism?
"Who cares, wins"
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023